

: .;: : /. '.'■''^ 




... .....;.'. • ' ■;.... ^ 


E440 




.5 





V** •*«•- V^ •*^*-. *W* ; 

f: j?\ • 






**o' 




r oV 




r *0' 












*S <£ ^ ^SB** J* % 





» ^ v 



V^V V*^V V^-\* 








^cr 






r^ 



u*<* ^ .& 








<^ 




'oK 




. *^ 0* 
















**% 




^ «^ \ *L 
V .*•'•„ ^b A> 





i°, 








THE CRISIS 

OF 

EIGHTEEN HUNDRED AND SIXTY-ONE 

IN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 

UNITED STATES. 

ITS CAUSE, 

AND HOW IT SHC'JLD BE MET. 



CONTAINING THE CELEBRATED PROCLAMATION OF ANDREW 
JACKSON TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA NULLIFIERS; WEB- 
STER'S ANSWER TO HAYNE ON THE SUBJECT OF 
NULLIFICATION, AND SEVERAL EXTRACTS 
FROM LETTERS WRITTEN BY JOHN JAY, 
JAMES MADISON, AND ALEXANDER 
HAMILTON, PENDING THE ADOP- 
TION OF THE CONSTITU- 
TION. 



-/- 




BY A. D/STEEIGHT. 



INDIANAPOLIS, IND.: 

PUBLISHED BY THE i¥THOS. 

186.1. 



E44S 



Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year eighteen hundred 
and sixty-one, 

BY A. D. STREIGHT, 

In the Clerk's office of the District Court of the United States for the 
District of Indiana. 



CONTENTS. 



Crisis — its Cause - • 7 

Crisis — How to Meet it 17 

Constitution 17 

Crittenden's Amendment i94 

Jack sou's Proclamation 41 

Jackson's Administration compared with Buchanan's 08 

Missouri Compromise 93 

Missouri Compromise compared with Crittenden's Amendment 92 

Oath of President 22 

People — shall they rule 84 

People — duty of. 85 

Treason — what constitutes 23 

Treason — who are guilty of. 23 

Union — how to presere the 81 

Union — the effects of war to sustain the 83 

Union — why founded — Madison and others' opinions 36 

Union — utility of 24 

Webster's answer to Hayne C8 



TO THE FLAG OF OUR UNION, 

TO THE MEMOEY OF THE IMMORTAL HEEOES, 

WHO ESTABLISHED IT, 
AND TO THE TRUE HEARTED PATRIOTS, 

WHO WILL MAINTAIN IT, 

THIS VOLUME IS MOST RESPECTFULLY" DEDICATED, 
RY THE AUTHOR. 



PREFACE. 



In presenting this volume to the people, we shall offer no 
apology. It has been our constant effort to condense into as 
small a compass as possible our views relative to the cause 
of our nation's calamity, and the proper course to be pursued 
to restore the supremacy of the laws, the integrity of the con- 
stitution, and to preserve the Union. We have aimed at 
nothing but the good of our distracted country. That some 
will differ with us relative to our proposed plan of managing 
our national affairs in this hour of peril, is no more than we 
expect We are aware that there are true-hearted and well- 
meaning men who are of the opinion that we had better com- 
promise with the traitors to our country than to use forcible 
moans to compel obedience to the laws. But wo think 
they are seriously mistaken ; that such a measure will' but 
produce a temporary calm that will be succeeded by a storm 
of increased violence. We have labored in the first place to 
show that our present troubles are owing to a mistaken poli- 
cy on the part of our government in adopting temporary pa- 
cification measures, instead of maintaining the supremacy of 
the laws. We have also endeavored to show from letters 
written by some of the founders of our government, that this 
is a government of the people collectly, and not a govern- 
ment of the States. We have further endeavored to show 
that the wisest of our statesmen were in favor of enforcing 
the laws regardless of the feelings of those who rebelled 
against them ; and finally, we trust, that we have shown that 
a Eepublican government cannot be maintained unless the 



6 PREFACE. 

people of every section of the country are compelled to sub- 
mit to the constitutional acts of the majority. We wish our 
Southern brethren no harm, but they must learn that this is 
a government composed of freemen who will submit to their 
dictation no longer; and the sooner they are apprized of this 
fact the better it will be for all pai-ties concerned. The ne- 
cessity for a work of this kind has caused us to lay aside most 
pressing business matters which needed our attention ; but 
in these perilous times we feel it our duty to do all we can to 
unite the people upon this momentous crisis in our national 
affairs. The hurried manner in which this work has been 
prepared, will account for the imperfections. 

A. D. STEEIGHT. 



THE CRISIS. 

WHAT PRODUCED IT. 



When we behold a blooming youth Just entering upon the 
sphere of manhood, the fondest hopes of his honored parents,, 
the admiration of all who know him, the brightest genious of 
his age, begin to wither and decay, our sinking spirits are 
aroused to make deep, anxious, earnest enquiiy as to the 
nature and cause of the disease that threatens to drag him 
to an untimely grave, and bring misery, sorrow and pain to 
his unhappy parents, friends and admirers, and if there is to 
be found a remedy within the knowledge of man that will 
remove the malady, we are wont to apply it with the utmost 
promptitude, and await its effects with fearful apprehensions 
and the deepest suspense. No time is lost or exertion spared 
by the friends of the afflicted, but with a united effort they 
rally, each anxious to contribute the utmost of his ability to 
rescue the unfortunate sufferer from the dangers that threaten 
to rob them of one to whom they feel bound by every en- 
dearing tie that binds mankind to earth. Now, while a case 
like this should justly excite our sympathies and awaken 
every principle of humanity dwelling in the* heart, yet Iioav 
unimportant and insignificant is such a case, wheal compared 
with the decaying symptoms of a great, free, powerful and 
prosperous nation of over thirty millions of inhabitants, 
whose institutions have been the hope and pride of the 
friends of liberty, whose prosperity is the marvel of the 
world, whose commerce extends to the most remote portions 
of the earth, whose territory covers twenty-three degrees of 
Jattitude and sixty degrees of longitude, whose soil is unsur- 



"8 THE CRIBTS. 

passed for the variety and richness of its productions, whose 
government has been the shield and asylum for the oppressed 
of all nations, and whose prosperity and power has been the 
object of jealousy and dread of the tyrants of every division 
of the globe. Yes, America has been, since the beginning of 
the nineteeth century, the stumbling block of tyrany, the 
good Samaritan to the poor and unfortunate of the civilized 
portions of the earth, her unexampled progress the astonish- 
ment and admiration of every lover of liberty and friend of 
humanity, the framers of her institutions are honored as the* 
noblest statesmen of any age, for their patriotism, purity and 
wisdom. And yet, strange as it may seem, this model gov- 
ernment, this land of the free and home of the brave, pre- 
senting an aggregate of individual and national wealth, hap- 
piness and prosperity unequalled by the same numbers on 
the face of the earth, although in the first century of its gi- 
gantic infancy, it is now trembling with all the convulsive 
symptoms of revolution and civil commotion, which threat- 
ens to undermine the very basis of our institutions and our 
liberties. Nay, the threatening storm is now producing a 
tumultuous sensation that is rocking the temple of liberty 
from top to bottom, and from center to circumference. 

Such being the sad picture of the true condition of our 
country, we will proceed to make earnest enquiry as to the 
cause of the existing evils and from whence they come ; for 
it is a well known principle in politics, as well as every other 
science, that in order to apply the rightful remedy for an 
existing evil, it is of the utmost importance that the nature 
and source of the evil should be carefully studied, and 
thoroughly understood by those having the case in charge. 

Although the threatening aspect of our national affairs 
have called forth the opinions of some of our most able 
statesmen, relative to the causes of our present troubles, yet, 
with due deference to their talents, sagacity and wisdom, we 
feel constrained to say, that, in our opinion, they have en- 
tirely overlooked, or omitted to mention, one of the chief 
causes that have rendered the people of the Southern States 
so turbulant, defiant, and, at last, nearly ungovernable. 

We will now proceed to give a brief statement of what we 



HOW TO MEET IT. 

believe to be the source from whence most, if not all, our 
present difficulties can be traced, and by so doing we trust 
the means for restoring peace to the country will bo more 
easily and unanimously decided upon. 

In searching the political history of our country, it appears 
that in 1810 and '20, Congress objected to the further exten- 
sion of slavery; (which, of course, it had a perfect right to 
do,) consequently Missouri was rejected when she applied for 
admission, because of her constitution recognizing that insti- 
tution. At this the South became very indignant, and her 
statesmen predicted a -speeded dissolution of the Union, un- 
less Missouri was admitted. The result was a compromise 
in which the South obtained all she demanded, and then we 
learn nothing of her revolting spirit until the celebrated 
tariff difficulty came up, which called out General Jackson's 
proclamation, in 1832; and although that old hero stood his 
ground firmly and did his whole duty nobly, yet there were 
those who were fearful that South Carolina would injure 
herself, like the spoiled boy, who throws himself on the floor, 
and in the midst of his rage, proceeds to bruise his head 
against articles of a more substantial character, consequently 
there was a compromise effected to appease her wrath. 
Again, when we were about appropriating money to pay 
Mexico for territory obtained from her, David Wilmot offered 
a proviso, that inasmuch as slavery did not exist in that ter- 
ritory at the time it came into our possession, it should not 
exist there thereafter. A very wise proviso, and a vast ma- 
jority of the people of the country were in favor of it, but 
then it did not suit the South, consequently, her statesmen 
predicted an immediate dissolution of the Union, if Mr. Wil- 
mot's proviso should become a law, and, of course, most of 
us loved the Union, hence we threw Mr. Wilmot's proviso 
overboard. But shortly after that, California made applica- 
tion to come into the Union as a free State. This was very 
obnoxious to our Southern brethren, consequently, they 
would dissolve the Union, unless there was some concessions 
made. Every body was at a loss to know what the nature 
of the concession could be, for the government had already 
signed several blanks for the South to fill out to their own 



10 TH)E CRISIS. 

liking, and it was supposed, that in their wisdom, they had 
secured, at least, what belonged to them ; but then the coun- 
try was declared to be in imminent danger of a speedy dis- 
solution, unless there could be a compromise effected with 
the South. All hands were set at work to ascertain whether 
there was anything which the government had not already 
granted them, and after diligent search it was found that 
there was occasionally a fugitive slave escaping from south- 
ern bondage, and as the people in some pertions of the coun- 
try were not much inclined to extend any great amount of 
sympathy to those who were wont to pursue said fugitives, 
the South finally concluded to make this proposition i That 
in case the government would compel every northern man to 
aid in catching and returning the fugitive slaves at his own 
cost and expense, then they, the South, would allow Califor- 
nia to be admitted as a free State, and suffer the Union to 
remain undivided. Most of us remember well when this 
ultimatum was presented to us. "We generally disliked the 
idea of being called blood hounds and negro catchers, by the 
civilized nations of the earth, saying nothing about the ex- 
pense or oar feelings attending this unpleasant operation, but 
then we loved our eonntry, and could not think of its destruc- 
tion without feelings of sadness, and when the fire-eating 
gentry would show their teeth, brandish their bowie knives 
and draw their revolvers, expressing their readiness, willing- 
ness, and final determination to shoot down, cut and carve, 
and smash things generally, provided we did not consent to 
catch Sambo; life being sweet to us, and peace being desir- 
able, we finally concluded to save our country, even if we 
were compelled to chase Sambo to do it. And here again we 
compromised upon the basis of what was called the Fugitive 
Slave Law of 1850. We do not claim any great show of 
bravery or firmness in this case, but then if self degradation 
and humiliation to save our country is a mark of patriotism, 
we would be sorry to hear of a more patriotic people than 
we of the north proved ourselves to be in this transaction. 

Peace being again declared to exist, things seemed to move 
quietly along until the winters of 1853- '54, when, to every- 
body's surprise, (I mean in the North,) one Stephen A. Doug- 



HOW TO MEET IT, 11 

las, desiring to become President of tho United States, set 
himself at work to find out whether there was not something 
more which the South might have granted her to enhance 
her interests. Stephen, being a man of great industry and 
perseverance, searched carefully and thoroughly, and at last 
he found a restriction on the extension of tho institution of 
slavery north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes north 
latitude. With great earnestness, and a show of fairness, he 
entered into the task of removing this restriction. Ho was 
soon made acquainted with the fact that this restriction was 
but a part of a solemn compact, and that tho party for whose 
benefit tho restriction was established, had paid for it a largo 
price, and a disinheritance at this time would be gross in- 
justice toward the party aggrieved. 

Even some of the Southern Senators labored hard to dis- 
suade Stephen from his purpose, on this account, but then 
Stephen was desirous of becoming President, and not being 
excessively burthened with a high sense of justice, he was 
inexorable in his undertaking, and pressed it with vigor and 
energy. Southern statesmen espoused the cause with their 
usual unanimity, and again declared that unless the restric- 
tion was removed this Union would be dissolved. All will 
remember how reluctant the people of the free States were 
to grant this demand ; but, as in former times, we loved our 
country, and when its very existence was threatened we were 
desirous of avoiding the great calamity ; hence, the restric- 
tion was removed, and the famous Kansas and Nebraska Act 
became a law. 

Although the South had thus far been successful in obtain- 
ing whatever they demanded, nevertheless, the defiant course 
they had pursued, the increasing frequency, and the nature 
of the demands, together with their refusal to bo governed 
by a compromise, even after dictating tho terms of it them- 
selves, began to open the eyes of some of our Northern states- 
men — hence, the Republican party sprang into existence in 
1854 with the avowed intention of resisting through the bal- 
lot-box each and every encroachment from our Southern 
brethren thereafter. This was declared by tho South to bo 
very dangerous to the Union, and in 185G, when the Pepub- 



12 THE CRISIS. 

licans run a candidate in the person of John C. Fremont for 
the Presidency, the South declared that to be a great insult 
to her dignity, and a just cause for a dissolution of the Union. 
She blustered and threatened to such an extent that they suc- 
ceeded in frightening the people of some of the free States 
into the support of James Buchanan, which, together with 
her united vote, she succeeded in carrying the election, and 
Mr. Buchanan became President. It soon became evident 
that the South were not any way inclined to abandon their 
aggressive policy. 'The attempt to subjugate the people of 
Kansas b} r forcing slavery upon them, against the well known 
wish of three-fourths of the inhabitants, was sufficient to 
wake up still another class of the peoplo of the free States, 
which caused large accessions to the Eepublican party, and 
a complete division of the Democratic party. \ Finally, the 
Democrats met at Charleston on the 23d day of April, 1860, 
to nominate candidates for President and Yice-President. 
Protection for slave property in the territories was demand- 
ed by the South — it was rejected — the convention split and 
adjourned. The South nominated a separate candidate upon 
the slave protection platform, and again resorted to her old 
tune of declaring the Union in danger; but the people had 
become disgusted with this kind of electioneering, and most 
emphatically refused to be bullied into the support of that 
dogma ^consequently they cast their votes for Abraham Lin- 
coln, and elected him, which is now declared by the South 
to be sufficient cause for dissolving the Union.,.' But some of 
the more moderate of the Southerners are willing to suffer a 
portion of the Union to remain undivided, provided the 
North will consent to amend the Constitution so as to legal- 
ize slavery as a national institution. This is a very moder- 
ate request indeed ; but, fellow countrymen, are you ready to 
grant it ? 

We have thus sketched a brief history of what we believe 
to be the true cause of the present crisis. And why is it the 
cause? The answer is plain to everyone — the South have 
been in the habit of controlling the policy of the government, 
by argument, if they could, but by threats of violence if they 
failed with the first. They have been successful in so many 



HOW TO MEET IT. 13 

schemes of this kind, that they begun to look upon that con- 
dition of things as co-existent with our government. Now 
we shall not contend that our Southern brethren are any more 
turbulent and ungovernable than the same number of North- 
ern men would be, if they had been similarly dealt with. 
Had the government of the United States, iustead of com- 
promising with the South when threats were made, pursued 
a straightforward course regardless of the threats, or those 
who made them, and in case there had been forcible resist- 
ance to the laws, called out sufficient force to suppress the 
rebellion, then the people of the South would have learned 
one important lesson in earlier times. 

This would have saved both them and the government 
much trouble and expense, but since they have not learned 
this losson before, they should learn it now; and though they 
may bo somewhat like an overgrown, high-spirited colt, that 
has never been harnessed, yet, with patience, kindness and 
firmness, we trust they will still learn the lesson without very 
seriously injuring either themselves or others. Should this 
not be the case, if they are determined to resist all legal re- 
straint, can there be any advantage in further delaying the 
use of force ? Can any one pretend that further concession 
would help the case permanently ? There is no use of dodg- 
ing the question. (All must admit that the great cause of 
our present troubles is owing to an unwillingness of the 
South to submit to any terms except such as they may dic- 
tate^ And some of them have even gone so far as to say that 
even though they are allowed this privilege, they would not 
abandon their treasonable designs. Verily we believe that 
Uncle Sam has spoiled some of his boys by over indulgence. 
We will endeavor to show this to be the case, by showing 
that, where resistance to the laws has been met by force, in- 
stead of concession, the people are more law-abiding citiaens, 
at least we hear of no threats from that source of overthrow- 
ing the government, unless certain measures are adopted. 
It is a noticeable fact that, during our national existence, 
there has never been any concession, on the part of the gov- 
ernment of the United States, granted to any portion of the 
north, where there has been resistance to the laws; but tho 



14 THE CRISIS. 

strong arm of the government has been used to put down 
such resistance whenever it became necessary. The great 
rebellion of 1785, called Shay's Eebellion, was met with force, 
and the leaders punished. The great Whisky Eebellion, as 
it is called, was suppressed with an armed force 15,000 
strong in 1791. General "Washington was then president, 
showing that he recognised the principle of suppressing in- 
surrection by force, if necessary to do so, in order to main- 
tain the supremacy of the law. \ Again, we find the United 
States using force to carry out the fugitive slave law in the 
Burns case, and, in fact, several others. The Kansas troubles 
were met with force, not compromise. All these cases have 
occurred in the north, and have been promptly met by the 
government, which has had a tendency to teach the people 
of that section of the country that, to resist the laws, is sure 
to incur the legal penalty. Eemonstrance has been of no 
avail — the laws were pointed to as the guide. This was the 
case particularly in the Kansas troubles, when the laws of 
the notorious bogus legislatux-e were being forced upon the 
people by the government bayonets. Mr. Buchanan was then 
implored to desist, and allow the people to re-construct the 
laws of the territory. They were told that, although the 
laws were oppressive, yet so long as they remained on the stat- 
ute books of the territory, they were the laws of that country, 
and must be enforced. This has uniformly been the course 
of the government toward the people of the north. We do 
•not complain of this, but simply refer to it to show that, 
while the people of the north have been taught to obey the 
2aws, or suffer the penalty of their violation, the people of 
the south have been allowed to control the policy of the gov- 
ernment by threats and violence, and as might have been 
•expected, they have at last become entirely insufferable. 
They will no longer be satisfied with anything in reason or 
•out of reason. They will neither be peaceable, nor allow 
others to live in peace. Their demands have become more 
frequent and of a more startling character — and why is this? 
It is because they have never been made sensible of the fact 
that the government of the United States is capable of en- 
forcing its laws in that portion of the country as well as in 
any other. 



HOW T\D MEET IT. 15 

How absurd it is, then, at this time, for ub to offer them an- 
other compromise — it would be like adding now fuel to the 
fire, it might suppress the flame momentarily, but when it 
bursts forth again it would be with increased vigor and vio- 
lence. We should not compromise in the least if wo desire 
permanent peace, but administer the laws with firmness and 
justice; and although it may take the force of arms to do so, 
yet a rivulet of blood, spilt at this time, will prevent rivers 
of it in the future. Let us not entail the evil effects of fail- 
ing to perform our duty upon our children, but sternly per- 
form our whole duty, and transmit to the next generation 
the good old ship of State in a sound and navigable condi- 
tion ; and if there be mutineers who persist in her destruc- 
tion let us warn them manfully of the dangers they are in- 
curring upon themselves, and as a last resort, rather than 
give up the ship, let us arrest their progress by force. 

Although we have given at length what we believe to be 
the great primary cause of our present crisis, yet there arc 
other more immediate causes, among which is the course that 
the Northern press have pursued since this secession move- 
ment has assumed a more positive form. Many of the lead- 
ing papers have advocated the policy of allowing such States 
to secede as choose to do so. And others have been loud with 
their demands for concession and compromise upon any ba- 
«is that would satisfy the traitors and restore peace. While 
still another class have battled manfully for the supremacy 
of the laws. This division of what is taken for the public 
sentiment, has been a source of consolation and encourage- 
ment to the traitors, while the government of the United 
States has stood silent with folded aims and allowed itself to 
be robbed of millions of dollars worth of property without 
raising a hand or uttering a solitary protest against the theft. 
What more encouragement could thoso who have been en- 
gaged in this treasonable scheme have asked for or desired ? 
They have been told by a portion of the Democratic press 
that the} T were perfectly justifiable in dissolving the Union ; 
and by a portion of the Eepub'ican press, that although they 
wero by no means justifiable in committing such an outrage- 
ous act, jet, if they were really in earnest, and were deter- 



16 THE CRISIS. 

mined to do so or fight, then the} 7 could go ahead, for there 
would be no fighting to maintain a Union with such unruly 
neighbors. Such seems to have been the reckless and ill- 
timed course on the part of the press at this present junc- 
ture, that it has encouraged the traitors by, representing the 
friends of the Union as divided into fragments, thus remov- 
ing all opposition to their reckless course. Had the press of 
the North presented an unbroken front in favor of the Union, 
and a determination to stand by it regardless of threats or 
even of violence, we have every reason to believe that the 
South would have hesitated and considered the nature of the 
calamity they were bringing upon themselves and their coun- 
try. That the spirit of compromise heretofore exercised on 
the part of our government toward those who have threat- 
ened violence, is the great source of our political troubles, 
can hardly admit of a doubt — why should we pursue the 
policy still further that has brought us to the very verge of 
ruin ? Since it is our wavering, compromising, and undeci- 
ded course that has brought our country to ruin, let us pro- 
ceed to adopt a more firm and decided course. Give the 
South all that is their right, and boldly refuse to submit to 
any dictation beyond our constitutional duty. This is not 
the time to amend constitutions nor to change public opin- 
ion, but let every man rally to the support of his country, 
and when peace is restored and traitors have laid down their 
arms and signified a willingness to submit to the laws, we 
will have more leisure to investigate the nature of the pro- 
posed constitutional amendments. 



THE CRISIS, 

AND HOW TO MEET IT. 



In the government of nations there are, sometimes, crises 
of the most momentous importance. They either promote 
stability or terminate in ruin. The result depends upon the 
virtue and patriotism of the mass of the people, and the wis- 
dom, prudence and unflinching firmness of their rulers and 
statesmen. 

The United States of America are in the midst of just such 
a crisis at present, and nothing is more important than cor- 
rect views with regard to that crisis on the part of the peo- 
ple. To aid in the dissemination of such views, in order to 
produce unity of action among all classes of the people is the 
object of this publication, in which we shall ignore mere par- 
tisanship and take large and patriotic and comprehensive 
views of the genius and principles of our government. 

One of the gravest questions for the consideration of the 
people of this nation, and for their enlightened solution, has 
just arisen, that has ever been presented for an answer since 
the formation of our republican government. It is this: Has 
any State in the Union a right, under the present Constitution, 
peaceably to withdraw itself from that Union, for the purpose 
of setting up a separate, distinct, and, necessarily, conflicting 
nationality ? 

Very important is it that this question should be correctly 
answered in the present juncture, and that the people should 
2 



28 THE CRISIS. 

be fully prepared to act understanding^. Vast and immeas- 
urable results depend upon it. 

If this vital question could be answered in the affirmative, 
as some seem to think, then would the federal compact, by 
which these States are held together, be a mere rope of sand, 
without strength or tenacity, subject to be ruptured by the 
slightest discord. Such a solution of the question, if acted 
upon practically, would carry us back to the old confedera- 
tion, by the articles of which these States weve connected in 
their associated capacity previous to the adoption of the pres- 
ent constitution. And what was that confederation ? Merely 
a league of States, in which each individual member of that 
league was at liberty to act in her sovereign capacity, with- 
out any binding restrictions. Each individual member of 
that confederation could levy taxes, raise revenue, make alli- 
ances, declare war, make peace, and do whatever else she 
chose without consultation with the rest of the members, and 
without being held amenable for her action, except just so 
far as the general law of nations held h#r amenable. From 
that confederation she could at any time withdraw or secede, 
without being rebellious or traitorous to the other members. 

Experience proved to the satisfaction of the wise, patriotic 
and far seeing fathers of the republic, that such a confedera- 
tion was entirely ineffectual for the accomplishment of the 
great purposes for which it was formed. It possessed not the 
concentrated power of binding and irrepealable unity to pro- 
tect the common flag of a common Union. It could not, 
therefore, command the respect and the honor of other na- 
tions, nor promote its own stability and permanence. 

Is the present Union similar to that? Can a South Caro- 
lina, or a Massachusetts, or any other disaffected State with- 
draw or secede at will, as she could from the Old Confedera- 
tion, and set up, if she choose, an independent nationality? 
No such thing. The present compact and constitution grew 
out of the absolute necessities consequent upon the inefficien- 
cy of the old confederation. They were established solely 
to prevent or obviate that inefficiency, and provide a com- 
mon flag and a common government capable of commanding 
respect. An examination of the present Constitution will 



HOW TO MEET IT. 19 

show that fact. We will, therefore, present those provisions 
of that instrument which have a direct bearing upon the de- 
cision of this question, and then show by the record how the 
fathers of that Constitution understood its powers, and how 
that understanding has been confirmed by all the precedents 
in the history of the government to the present time. 

The very preamble of the Constitution itself shows that 
it was formed for the purpose of establishing a government 
stronger and more efficient than the old confederation. It is 
in these words: 

"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a 
more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tran- 
quility, provide for the common defence, promote the general 
welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and 
our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for 
the United States of America." 

Among other things, this preamble declares that the pre- 
sent constitution was u ordained and established " " in order 
to form a union m ore perfect " than existed under the provi- 
sions of the old confederation — a union that could not be 
dissolved at the pleasure or choice of any State or any num- 
ber of States without the consent of three-fourths of the sove- 
reign people. It conceded to a general government certain 
powers and rights, which were, of course, subtracted from 
the powers and rights of the separate State sovereignties, and 
these powers and rights were vested solely in the hands of a 
President, " a Congress of the United States," and a Supreme 
Court created and elected according to the provisions of that 
constitution. And now, to understand this matter, what 
were those particular powers and rights which were thus ab- 
stracted from the separate State sovereignties and vested in 
a general government? They are very emphatically, clearly 
and forcibly declared in article I, section 8, of the constitu- 
tion of the United States. They are thus expressed : 

M The Congress shall have power — 

"1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, excises; to 
pay the debts, and provide for the common defence and gen- 



20 THE CRISIS. 

eral welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and 
excises shall be uniform throughout the United States ; 

" 2. To borrow money on the credit of the United States; 

" 3. To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among 
the several States, and with the Indian tribes ; 

"4. To establish an uniform rule of naturalization, and 
uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the 
United States ; 

"5. To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of for- 
eign coin, and fix the standai-d of weights and measures ; 

"6. To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the 
securities and current coin of the United States ; 

" 7. To establish post offices and post roads ; 

" 8. To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by 
securing for limited times, to authors and inventors, the ex- 
clusive right to their respective writings and discoveries ; 

" 9. To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court; 
to define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the 
high seas, and offences against the law of nations ; 

"10. To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, 
and make rules concerning captures on land and water; 

"11. To raise and support armies ; but no appropriations 
of money to that use, shall be for a longer term than two 
years ; 

"12. To provide and maintain a navy; 

" 13. To make rules for the government and regulation of 
the land and naval forces ; 

" 14. To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the 
laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel inva- 
sions ; 

" 15. To provide for organizing, arming and disciplining 
the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be 
employed in the service of the United States, reserving to 
the States, respectively, the appointment of the officers and 
the authority of training the militia, according to the disci- 
pline prescribed by Congress ; 

" 16. To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatso- 
ever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) 
as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance 



HOW TO MEET IT. 21 

of Congress, become the seat of government of the United 
States, and to exercise like authority over all places pur- 
chased b} T the consent of the legislature of the State in -which 
the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsen- 
als, dock yards and other needful buildings : — And 

" 17. To make all laws which shall be necessary and pro- 
per for carrj-ing into execution the foregoing powers, and all 
other powers vested by this constitution in the government 
of the United States, or in any department or officer there- 
of." 

The powers enumerated in this section are very definite, 
and nothing we could say would make that fact appear more 
apparent. Now if these powers are conferred upon the gen- 
eral government by the common consent of all the States of 
the Union, or more especially by all the people of all the 
States, can any one State exercise any of those reserved pow- 
ers? Most certainly not. But the framers of the constitu- 
tion did not leave this to be inferred. They settled the ques- 
tion definitely in section ten. Here it is: 

"1. No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or con- 
federation ; grant letters of marque and reprisal ; coin mo- 
ney ; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and sil- 
ver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of at- 
tainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of 
contracts ; or grant any title of nobility. 

"2. No State shall, without the consent of the Congress, 
lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what 
may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection laws ; 
and the nett produce of all duties and imposts, laid by any 
State on imports or exports, shall be for the use of the treas- 
ury of the United States, and all such laws shall be subject 
to the revision and control of the Congress. No State shall, 
without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tunnage, 
keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any 
agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign 
power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such 
imminent danger as will not admit of delay." 



22 THE CRISIS. 

This section plainly and -positively prohibits the States from 
doing certain things ivithout the consent of Congress. They 
can neither contract alliances, collect revenue, coin money, 
nor engage in war in their capacity of States. 

To guard the powers of the general government from en- 
croachment on the part of the States, and to preserve them 
intact avd unimpaired, the President of the United States, 
as the chief Executive officer of the government, takes this 
oath : 

"I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR (or affirm) THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY 
EXECUTE THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, 
AND WILL, TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY, PRESERVE, PROTECT 
AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES." 

We have thus far enumerated some of the powers delegated 
by the Constitution to the federal government in the precise 
language of that constitution, and have shown that the chief 
executive of the government is sworn to exercise those pow- 
ers by enforcing the constitution, and, of course, the laws, 
&c, which are made under its sanction and by its authority. 

This constitution was adopted by a vast majority of the 
people of every State in the Union — adopted too with the 
understanding that it was perpetually binding — adopted icith- 
out any proviso for icithdraical or secession in case of dissatis- 
faction — adopted when it was known that, even to amend it, 
either two-thirds of both houses of Congress must "propose 
amendments, or two-thirds of all the State Legislatures unite 
in an application to call a convention of States for proposing 
amendments," and that, when such amendments were pro- 
posed, they must u be ratified" by "the legislatures of three- 
fourths of all the States, or by conventions in three-fourths 
thereof." This shows clearly and conclusively that our 
fathers considered that they were establishing a government 
indissoluble — a government for all time, incapable of dis- 
ruption by separate State action or by the violence of local 
faction. 

In the strong light of these facts how are we to regard the 
present attitude of South Carolina? As treasonable and re- 
bellious to rightful authority, which she herself assisted to 



nOW TO MEET IT. 23 

establish. She has no right whatever, under the existing 
compact, to withdraw herself from the Union, or to annul 
that compact into which she voluntarily entered, when she 
adopted that constitution. By that adoption she forever 
signed away such a right — voluntarily she sets her signature 
to a compact having no such proviso of choice. If she secede 
then — if she break, or attempt to break, that compact, she 
engages in a revolution, and revolution is rebellion — revolu- 
tion is treason. Of that capital crime she, or rather her citi- 
zens, are even now guilty. What constitutes treason ? The 
constitution defines it in Article 3, Section III : 

"1. Treason against the United States shall consist only 
in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, 
giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted 
of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the 
same overt act, or on confession in open court. 

" 2. The congress shall have power to declare the punish- 
ment of treason; but no attainder of treason shall work cor- 
ruption of blood, or forfeiture, except during the life of the 
person attainted." 

Now has not South Carolina "levied war?" Has she not 
collected armies to resist the United States? Has she not 
obstructed the collection of the revenue of the nation ? Has 
she not even taken the fortifications and arsenals and confis- 
cated the property of the United States? All these things 
has she done, and if this be not "levying war" — if this be 
not "treason" — rank "treason," I know not what is. And 
yet, strange as it may seem, there are men in all the States 
so wedded to party that they encourage and justify South 
Carolina in her mad secession schemes, and by so doing give 
"aid and comfort" to the sworn "enemies" of the United 
States. Did they ever think that they too arc traitors, and 
that they are as legally deserving of a halter as the madest 
secession hotspur of South Carolina? 

Like the old tories of the revolution, they are, however, 
but few in the Northern States, and their number, thanks to 
the intelligence of the people, is rapidly growing less. Soon 
will there be but one sentiment in all sane minds upon this 



24 THE CRISIS. 

subject. All will see that this Union must be preserved, un- 
broken by rebels, and traitors be brought to condign punish- 
ment, unless we would insanely jeopardise all for which our 
fathers fought and bled and died upon the battle fields of the 
revolution. 

To aid in cx'eating a healthy public sentiment upon this 
important subject, I will now give some of the arguments in 
favor of the Union and of the present constitution, advanced 
by some of the early fathers of the republic. To do this, I 
shall first draw largely from certain political papers, enti 
tied the "Federalist," written while the adoption of the 
present constitution was pending, and addressed to the peo- 
ple of the State of New York, to explain the principles of 
the new constitution, and to enforce the propriety and neces- 
sity of its adoption. They were the united productions of 
John Jay, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton, three 
brilliant political lights. 

In the first eight numbei's of these papers the dangers of 
foreign force and influence, and of war between the States, 
and the effects of internal war in producing standing armies 
unfriendly to liberty, were portrayed in a very masterly 
manner. Several other papers follow from which I quote 
largely, as they are just as appropriate now to show the 
benefits of a stable and consolidated Union, and the evils of 
disunion, as then : 

"THE UTILITY OP THE UNION AS A SAFEGUARD AGAINST DO- 
MESTIC FACTION AND INSURRECTIONS. 

"A firm union will be of the utmost moment to the peace 
and liberty of the States, as a barrier against domestic fac- 
tion and insurrection. 

" It is impossible to read the history of the petty republics 
of Greece and Italy, without feeling sensations of horror and 
disgust at the distractions with which they were continually 
agitated, and at the rapid succession of revolutions, by which 
they were kept perpetually vibrating between the extremes 
of tyranny and anarchy. If they exhibit occasional calms, 
these only serve as short-lived contrasts to the furious storms 
that are to succeed. If now and then intervals of felicity 



HOW TO MEET IT. 



25 



open themselves to view, we behold them with a mixture of 
regret arising from the reflection, that the pleasing scenes 
before us are soon to be overwhelmed by tho tempestuous 
waves of sedition and party rage. If momentary rays of 
glory break forth from the gloom, while they dazzle us with 
a transient and fleeting brilliancy, they at the same time ad- 
monish us to lament that the vices of government should 
pervert the direction and tarnish the luster of those bright 
talents and exalted endowments, for which the favored soils 
that produced thorn have been so justly celebrated. 

" From the disorders that disfigure the annals of those re- 
publics, the advocates of despotism have di-awn arguments, 
not only against the forms of republican government but 
against the very principles of civil liberty. They have de- 
cried all free government as inconsistent with the order of 
society, and have indulged themselves in malicious exulta- 
tion over its friends and partizans. Happily for mankind, 
stupendous fabrics reared on the basis of liberty, which have 
flourished for ages, have, in a few glorious instances, refuted 
their gloomy sophisms. And, I trust, America will be the 
broad and solid foundation of other edifices not less magnifi- 
cent, which will be equally permanent monuments of their 
error. 

"But it is not to be denied, that the portraits they have 
sketched of republican government, were too just copies of 
the originals from which they were taken. If it had been 
found impracticable to have devised models of a more per- 
fect structure, the enlightened friends of liberty would have 
been obliged to abandon the cause of that species of govern- 
ment as indefensible. The science of politics, however, like 
most other sciences, has received great improvement. The 
efficacy of various principles is now well understood, which 
were either not known at all, or imperfectly known to the 
ancients. The regular distribution of power into distinct de- 
partments ; the introduction of legislative balances and 
checks; tho institution of courts composed of judges, hold- 
ing their offices during good behavior; the representation 
of tho people in the legislature, by deputies of their own elec- 
tion ; these are either wholly new discoveries, or have made 



26 THE CRISIS. 

their principal progress towards perfection in modern times. 
They are means, and powerful means, by which the excel- 
lencies of republican government may be retained, and its 
imperfections lessoned or avoided. To this catalogue of c"r- 
cumstances, that tend to the amelioration of popular systems 
of civil government, I shall venture, however novel it may 
appear to some, to add one more, on a principle which has 
been made the foundation of an objection to the new consti- 
tution ; I mean the enlargement of the orbit within which 
such systems are to revolve, either in respect to the dimen- 
sions of a single State, or to the consolidation of several 
smaller States into one great confederacy. The latter is that 
which immediately concerns the object under consideration. 
It will, however, be of use to examine the principle in its ap- 
plication to a single State, which shall be attended to in an- 
other place. 

" The utility of a confederacy, as well to suppress faction, 
and to guard the internal tranquility of States, as to increase 
their external force and security, is in reality not a new idea. 
It has been practiced upon in different countries and ages, 
and has received the sanction of the most approved writers 
on the bubject of politics. The opponents of the plan pro- 
posed have with great assiduity cited and circulated the ob- 
servations of Montesquieu on the necessity of a contracted 
territory for a republican government. But they seem not 
to have been apprized of the sentiments of that great man 
expressed in another part of his work, nor to have adverted 
to the consequences of the principle to which they subscribe 
with such read} r acquiescence. 

When Montesquieu recommends a small extent for repub- 
lics, the standards he had in view were of dimensions far 
short of the limits of almost every one of these States. Nei- 
ther Virginia, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York, JS T . 
Carolina, nor Georgia, can by any means be compared with 
the models from which he reasoned, and to which the terms 
of his description apply. If we therefore receive hi.s ideas 
on this point, as the criterion of truth, we shall be driven to 
the alternative either of taking refuge at once in the arms of 
monarchy, or of splitting ourselves into an infinity ©f little, 



MOW TO MEET IT. -< 

jealous, clashing, tumultuous commonwealths, the wretched 
nurseries of unceasing discord, and the miserable objects of 
universal pity or contempt. Some of tbo writers who have 
come forward on the other side of the question, seem to have 
been aware of the dilemma, and have even been bold enough 
to hint at the division of the largor States as a desirable thing. 
Such an infatuated policy, such a desperate expedient, might, 
by the multiplication of petty offices, answer the views of 
men who possess not qualifications to extend their influence 
beyond the narrow circles of personal intrigue ; but it could 
never promote the greatness or happiness of the people of 
America. 

"Referring the examination of the principle itself to an 
other place, as has been already mentioned, it will be suffi- 
cient to remark here, that in the sense of the author who has 
been most emphatically quoted upon the occasion, it would 
only dictate a reduction of the size of the more considerable 
members of the Union ; but would not militate against their 
being all comprehended in one confederate government. 
And this is the true question, in the discussion of which we 
are at present interested. 

"So far are the suggestions of Montesquieu from standing 
in opposition to a general union of the States, that he expli- 
citly treats ot a confederate REruBLic, as the expedient for 
extending the sphere of popular government, and reconciling 
the advantages of monarchy with those of republicanism. 

" 'It is very probable, says he, *that mankind would have 
been obliged, at length, to live constantly under the govern- 
ment of a single person, had they not contrived a kind of 
constitution, that has all the internal advantages of a repub- 
lican, together with the external force of a monarchical gov- 
ernment. 1 mean a confederate republic. 

" 'This form of government is a convention, by which sev- 
eral smaller States agree to become members of a larger one, 
which they intend to form. It is a kind of assemblage of 
societies, that constitute a new one, capable of increasing by 
means of new associations, till they arrive to such a degree 



♦Spirit of Laws, Vol. I, Book IX, Chapter I. 



28 THE CRISIS. 

of power as to be able to provide for the securit}'- of the 
united body. 

" 'A republic of this kind, able to withstand an external 
force, may support itself without any internal corruption. 
The form of this society prevents all manner of inconve- 
niences. 

" ' If a single member should attempt to usurp the supreme 
authority, he could not be supposed to have an equal author- 
ity and credit in all the confederate States. Were he to have 
too great influence over one, this would alarm the rest. Were 
he to subdue a part, that which would still remain free might 
oppose him with forces, independent of those which he had 
usurped, and overpower him before he could be settled in his 
usurpation. 

" ' Should a popular insurrection happen in one of the con- 
federate States, the others are able to quell it. Should abuses 
creep into one part, they are reformed by those that remain 
sound. The State may be destroyed on one side and not on 
the other ; the confederacy may be dissolved and the con- 
federates preserve their sovereignty. 

" ' As this government is composed of small republics, it 
enjoys the internal happiness of each, and with respect to its 
external situation, it is possessed, by means of the associa- 
tion, of all the advantages of large monarchies.' 

"I have thought it proper to quote at length these inter- 
esting passages, because they contain aluminous abridgment 
of the principal arguments in favor of the Union, and must 
effectually remove the false impressions which a misapplica- 
tion of the other parts of the work were calculated to pro- 
duce. They have, at the same time, an intimate connection 
with the more immediate design of this paper; which is to 
illustrate the tendency of the Union to repress domestic fac- 
tion and insurrection. 

"A distinction, more subtle than accurate, has been raised 
between a confederacy and a consolidation of the States. The 
essential characteristic of the first, is said to be the restric- 
tion of its authority to the members in their collective ca- 
pacities, without reaching to the individuals of whom they 
are composed. It is contended that the national council 



HOW TO MEET IT. 29 

ought to have no concern with any ohject of internal admin- 
istration. An exact equality ot suffrage between the mem- 
bers, has also been insisted upon as a leading feature of a 
confederate government. These positions are, in the main, 
arbitrary; they are supported neither by principle nor prece- 
dent. It has indeed happened, that governments of this kind 
have generally operated in the manner which the distinction 
taken notice of supposes to be inherent in their nature ; bu 
there have been in most of them extensive exceptions to the 
practice, which serve to prove, as far as example will go, that 
there is no absolute rulo on the subject. And it will be clearly 
shown, in the course of this investigation, that, as far as the 
principle contended for has prevailed, it has been tho cause 
of incurable disorder and imbecility in the government. 

"The definition of a confederate republic seems simply to be 
'an assemblage of societies,' or an association of two or more 
States into one State. The extent, modifications, and objects 
of the federal authority are mere matters of discretion. So 
long as the separate organization of the members be list abol- 
ished, 60 long as it exists by a constitutional necessity for 
local purposes, though it should be in perfect subordination 
to the general authority of the Union., it would still be, in 
fact and theory, an association of States, or a confederacy 
The proposed constitution, so far from implying an abolition 
of the State government, makes them constituent parts of the 
national sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representa- 
tion in the senate, and leaves in their possession certain ex- 
clusive, and very important, portions of the sovereign power. 
This fully corresponds, in every rational import of tho terms, 
with the idea of a federal government. 

"In the Lycian confederacy, which consisted of twenty- 
three cities, or republics, the largest were entitled to three 
votes in the common council, those of the middle class to two, 
and the smallest to one. The common council had the ap- 
pointment of all the judges and magistrates of the respective 
cities. This was certainly the most delicate species of inter- 
ference in their internal administration ; for if there be any- 
thing that seems exclusively appropriated to the local juris- 
dictions, it is the appointment of their own officers. Yet 



30 THE CRISIS. 

Montesquieu, speaking of this association, says, 'Were I to 
give a model of an excellent confederate republic, it would 
be that of Lycia.' Thus we perceive that the distinctions in- 
sisted upon were not within the contemplation of this en- 
lightened writer, and we shall be led to conclude that they 
are the novel refinements of an erroneous theory." 

The important paper just quoted from the ''Federalist," 
is from the gifted pen of James Madison, so long a prominent 
and leading statesman in the democratic party, and one of 
the framers of our present government. Had wo space we 
would quote another, equally important, from the same source 
and upon the same subject. 

This paper, its pointed facts and its powerful reasoning in 
favor of a stable Union, such as was contemplated by the 
present constitution, and against the defects of the old con- 
federation, we commend to the particular attention of the 
thinking masses of the present democratic party. Although 
written before the adoption of the existing constitution, and 
for the express purpose of inducing the people to ratify that 
constitution, it contains much that is applicable to the pres- 
ent political juncture, ^inasmuch as the present secession dog- 
mas of South Carolina and of the Calhoun school of politi- 
cians are exactly the loose, inefficient principles of that old 
confederation, and opposed to those of the present constitu- 
tion. 

Wo will here make an extract from another paper of the 
"Federalist," to show how Jay, Madison and Hamilton re- 
garded the defects of that confederation — to illustrate, with 
clearness, the absolute necessity of the adoption of our present 
constitution, considering, as they did, that jt would consti- 
tute an efficient remedy for those defects : 

"CONCERNING THE DEFECTS OF THE PRESENT CONFEDERA- 
TION, IN RELATION TO THE PRINCIPLE OF LEGISLATION FOR 
THE STATES IN THEIR COLLECTIVE CAPACITIES. 

" In the course of the preceding papers, I have endeavor- 
ed, my fellow citizens, to place before you, in a clear and con- 
vincing light, the importance of union to your political safe- 



IloW To MEET IT. 31 

ty and happiness. I have unfolded to you a complication of 
dangers to which you would bo exposed, should you permit 
that sacred knot, which binds the people of America togeth- 
er, to be severed or dissolved by ambition or by avarice, by 
jealousy or by misrepresentation. In tho sequel of the in- 
quiry, through which I propose to accompany you, the truths 
intended to be inculcated will receive further confirmation 
from facts and arguments hitherto unnoticed. 

"In pursuance of the plan which I have laid down for the 
discussion of the subject, the point next in order to be exam- 
ined is the ' insufficiency of the present confederation to the 
preservation of the Union.' 

"It may perhaps be asked what need there is of leasoning 
or proof to illustrate a position which is neither controvert- 
ed nor doubted ; to which the understandings and feelings of 
all classes of men assent ; and which, in substance is admit- 
ted by the opponents as well as by the friends of the new 
constitution? It must in truth be acknowledged, that how- 
ever these may differ in other respects, they in general ap- 
pear to harmonize in the opinion, that there are material im- 
perfections in our national system, and that something is ne- 
cessary to be done to rescue us from impending anarchy. 
The facts that support this opinion are no longer objects of 
speculation. They have forced themselves upon the sensi- 
bility of the people at large, and have at length extorted 
from those whose mistaken policy has had the principal share 
in precipitating the extremity at which we have arrived, a re- 
luctant confession of the reality of many of those defects in 
the scheme of our federal government, which have been long 
pointed out and regretted by the intelligent friends of the 
Union. 

" We may indeed with propriety, be said to have reached 
almost tho last stage of national humiliation. There is 
scarcely anything that can wound tho pride, or degrade tho 
character, of an independent people, which we do not ex- 
perience. Are there engagements, to the performance of 
which we are held by every tie respectable among men? 
These ar© the subjects of constant and unblushing violation. 
Do we owe debts to foreigners, and to our own citizens, con- 



32 THE CRISIS. 

tracted in a time of imminent peril, for the preservation of 
our political existence? These remain without any proper 
or satisfactory provision for their discharge. Have we valu- 
able territories and important posts in the possession of a 
foreign power, which, by express stipulations, ought long- 
since to have been surrendered? These are still retained, 
to the prejudice of our interest not less than of our rights. 
Are we in a condition to resent or to repel the aggression ? 
We have neither troops, nor treasury, nor government.* 
Are we even in a condition to remonstrate with dignity? 
The just imputations on our own faith, in respect to the same 
treaty, ought first to be removed. Are we entitled, by na- 
ture and compact, to a free participation in the navigation of 
the Mississippi ? Spain excludes us from it. Is public credit 
an indispensable resource in time of public danger? We 
seem to have abandoned its cause as desperate and irretriev- 
able. Is commerce of importance to national wealth? Ours 
is at the lowest point of declension. Is respectability in the 
eyes of foreign powers, a safeguard against foreign encroach- 
ments ? The imbecility of our government even forbids them 
to treat with us : Our ambassadors abroad are the mere pa- 
geants of mimic sovereignty. Is a violent and unnatural 
decrease in the value of land a symptom of national distress ? 
The price of improved land, in most parts of the country, is 
much lower than can be accounted for by the quantity of 
waste land at market, and can be only fully explained by that 
want of private and public confidence, which are so alarm- 
ingly prevalent among all ranks, and which have a direct 
tendency to depreciate property of every kind. Is private 
credit the friend and patron of industry ? That most useful 
kind which relates to borrowing and lending, is reduced 
within the narrowest limits, and this still more from an opin- 
ion of insecurity than from a scarcity of money. To shorten 
an enumeration of particulars which can afford neither pleas- 
ure nor instruction, it may in general be demanded, what in- 
dication is there of national disorder, poverty, and insignifi- 
ance, that could befal a community so peculiarly blessed with 



I mean for the Uniou. 



II()\V TO MKET IT. '.V.', 

natural advantages as we are, which docs not form ;i part of 
the dark catalogue of our public misfortunes'.'' 

" This is the melancholy situation to which we have been 
brought by those very maxims and councils, which would 
now deter us from adopting tho proposed constitution ; and 
which, not content with having conducted us to the brink of 
a precipice, seem resolved to plunge us into the abyss that 
awaits us below. Here, my countrymen, impelled by every 
motive that ought to influence an enlightened people, let us 
make firm stand for our safety, our tranquility, our dignity, 
our reputation. Let us at last break tho fatal charm which 
has too long seduced us from the paths of felicity and pros- 
perity. 

" It is true, as has been before observed, that facts too stub- 
born to be resisted, have produced a species of general assent 
to the abstract proposition, that there exist material defects 
in our national system ; but the usefulness of the concession, 
on the part of the old adversaries of federal measures, is de- 
stroyed by a strenuous opposition to a remedy, upon the only 
principles that can give it a chance of success. While they 
admit that the government of the United States is destitute 
of energy, they contend against conferring upon it those 
powers which are requisite to supply that euerg}'. They 
seem still to aim at things repugnant and irreconcilable; at 
an augmentation of federal authority, without a diminution 
of State authority ; at sovereignty in the Union, and com- 
plete independence in the members. They still, in fine, seem 
to cherish with blind devotion the political monster of an 
imperium in imperio. This renders a full display of the prin- 
cipal defects of the confederation necessary, in order to show, 
that the evils we experience do not proceed from minute or 
partial imperfections, but from fundamental errors in the 
structure of the building, which cannot be amended, other- 
wise than by an alteration in the very elements and main 
pillars of the fabric. 

•' The great and radical vice in the construction of the exist- 
ing confederation, is in the principle of legislation for 

STATES Or GOVERNMRNT.S IB their CORPORATE Or COLLECTIVE 

capacities, and as contradistinguished from the individuals 



34 THE CRISIS. 

of whom they consist. Though this principle does not run 
through all the powers delegated to the Union, yet it per- 
vades and governs those on which the efficacy of the rest de- 
pends." 

A violation of any of the articles of the old confederation 
was the act only of the States, as sovereign and independent 
parties to a contract, and did not implicate individuals in tho 
crime of treason, if acting under the sanction of such a State. 
Not so, however, with individuals under the present consti- 
tution, even though acting under the sanction of particular 
States; because the present constitution is that of the people 
and not of the States as States in their sovereign capacity, 
for the people of the States have delegated to a general gov- 
ernment, in the constitution, certain powers, which are taken 
away from the States, and cannot, therefore, be exercised by 
those States without subjecting the people of the States so ex- 
ercising them to punishment for high treason. 

To show that eminent statesmen, even before the adoption 
of our present constitution, so regarded the principles of the 
government proposed to be established under it, we will quoto 
another extract from the "Federalist," commencing on page 
102 of vol. I: 

" If it be possible to construct a federal government capa- 
ble of regulating the common concerns, and preserving the 
general tranquility, it must be founded, as to the objects com- 
mitted to its care, upon the reverse of the principle contend- 
ed for by the opponents of the proposed constitution. It 
must carry its agency to the PERSONS OF THE CITI- 
,ZENS. It must stand in need of no intermediate legisla- 
tion ; but must itself be empowered to employ the arm of 
the ordinary magistrate to execute its own resolutions. Tho 
majesty of tho national authority must be manifested through 
the medium of the courts of justice. The government of the 
Union, like that of each State, must be able to address itself 
immediately to the hopes and fears of INDIVIDUALS, and 
to attract to its support those passions which have the strong- 
est influence upon the human heart. It must, in short, pos- 
sess all the means, and have a right to all the methodg, of ex- 



nOW TO MEET IT. 35 

ccuting tho powers with which it is entrusted, that are pos- 
sessed and exercised by the governments of tho particular 
States." 

An argument against the adoption of our present constitu- 
tion was urged by its enemies to prevent its adoption, that it 
would create a central government too strong — a government 
so strong as to endanger tho reserved rights of the States. 
This objection is thus stated and answered upon pages 106 
and 107, vol. I, of the "Federalist:" 

"It may be said, that it would tend to render the govern- 
ment of the Union too powerful, and to enable it to absorb 
those residuary authorities which it might be judged proper 
to leave with the States for local purposes. Allowing the ut- 
most latitude to the love of power, which any reasonable man 
can require, I confess I am at a loss to discover what tempta- 
tion the persons entrusted with the administration of tho 
general government, could ever feel to divest the States of the 
authorities of that description. The regulation of the mere 
domestic police of a State appears to me to hold out slender 
allurements to ambition. Commerce, finance, negotiation, 
and war seem to comprehend all the objects which have 
charms for minds governed by that passion ; and all the pow- 
ers necessary to those objects ought, in the first instance, to 
be lodged in the national depository. The administration of 
private justice between the citizens of the same State; tho 
supervision of agriculture, and of other concerns of a simi- 
lar nature ; all those things, in short, which are proper to be 
provided for by local legislation, can never be desirable cares 
of a general jurisdiction. It is, therefore, improbable that 
there should exist a disposition in the federal eouncils to usurp 
the powers with which they are connected; because the at- 
tempt to exercise them would be as troublesome as it would 
be nugatory ; and the possession of them, for that reason, 
would contribute nothing to the dignity, to the importance, 
or to the splendor of tho national government." 

We will close our extracts from the luminous papers of tho 
"Federalist," with the following, premising, however, that, 



36 THE CRISIS. 

in these fearful times of raging secession madness, it would 
be well if the whole two volumes could be put in the hands 
of every intelligent individual in the nation. This extract 
refers again to the defects and the lamentable inefficiency of 
the old confederation, as contrasted with the proposed effi- 
ciency and stability of the government under the new con- 
stitution, a subject which cannot be too deeply engraven upon 
the mind of every patriot to whatever party he may belong. 
It can be found commencing upon page 131, of vol. 1, ot the 
"Federalist." and ending on page 133: 

"Having in the three last numbers taken a summary re- 
view of the principal circumstances and events which depict 
the genius and fate of other confederate governments, I shall 
now proceed in the enumeration of the most important of 
those defects which have hitherto disappointed our hopes 
from the system established among ourselves. To form a 
safe and satisfactory judgment of the proper remedy, it is 
absolutely necessary that we should be well acquainted with 
the extent and malignity of the disease. 

" The next most palpable defect of the existing confedera- 
tion, is the total want of a sanction to its laws. The Uni- 
ted States, as now composed, have no power to exact obedi- 
ence, or punish disobedience to their resolutions, either by 
pecuniary mulcts, by a suspension or divestiture of privileges, 
or by any other constitutional means. There is no express 
delegation of authority to them to use force against delin- 
quent members ; and if such a right should be ascribed to 
the federal head, as resulting from the nature of the social 
compact between the States, it must be by inference and con- 
struction, in the face of that part of the second article, by 
which it is declared, 'that each State shall retain every pow- 
er, jurisdiction, and right, not expressly delegated to the Uni- 
ted States in Congress assembled.' The want of such a right 
involves, no doubt, a striking absurdity, but we are reduced 
to the dilemma, cither of supposing that deficiency, prepos- 
terous as it may seem, or of contravening or explaining away 
a provision, which has been of late a repeated theme of the 
eulogies of those who oppose the new constitution ; and the 



HOW TO MEET IT. 37 

omission of which, in that plan, has been the subject of much 
plausible animadversion and severe criticism. If we are un- 
willing to impair the force of this applauded provision, we 
shall be obliged to conclude that the United States affords the 
extraordinary spectacle of a government destitute even of the 
shadow of constitutional power to enforce the execution of 
its own laws. It will appear, from the specimens which have 
been cited, that the American confederacy, in this particular, 
stands discriminated from every other institution of a similar 
kind, and exhibts a new and unexampled phenomenon in the 
political world. 

"The want of a mutual guarantee of the State govern- 
ments, is another capital imperfection in the federal plan. 
There is nothing of this kind declared in the articles that 
compose it; and to imply a tacit guarantee from considera- 
tions of utility, would be a still more flagrant departure from 
the clause which has been mentioned, than to imply a tacit 
power of coercion, from the like consideration. The want of 
a guarantee, though it might in its consequences endanger 
the Union, does not so immediately attack its existence, as 
the want of a constitutional sanction to its laws. 

" Without a guarantee, the assistance to be derived from 
the Union in repelling those domestic dangers, which may 
sometimes threaten the existence of the State constitutions, 
must be renounced. Usurpation may rear its crest in each 
State, and trample upon the liberties of the people, while the 
national government could legally do nothing more than be- 
hold its encroachments with indignation and regret. A suc- 
cessful faction may erect a tyranny on the ruins of order and 
law, while no succor could constitutionally be afforded by 
the Union to the friends and supporters of the government. 
The tempestuous situation, from which Massachusetts has 
scarcely emerged, evinces, that dangers of this kind are not 
merely speculative. Who can determine what might have 
been the issue of her late convulsions, if the mal-contents 
had been headed by a Caesar or by a Cromwell? Who can 
predict what a despotism, established in Massachusetts, would 
have upon the liberties of New Hampshire or Ehode Island, 
of Connecticut or New York ? 



38 THE CRISIS. 

" The inordinate pride of State importance has suggested 
to some minds an objection to the principle of a guarantee 
to the federal government, as involving an officious interfer- 
ence in the domestic concerns of the members. A scruple of 
this kind would deprive us of one of the principal advant- 
ages to be expected from Union, and can only flow from a 
misapprehension of the nature of the provision itself. It 
could be no impediment to reforms of the State constitutions 
by a majority of the people in a legal and peaceable mode. 
This right would remain undiminished. The guarantee could 
only operate against changes to be effected by violence. To- 
wards the prevention of calamities of this kind, too many 
checks cannot be provided. The peace of society and the 
stability of government depend absolutely on the efficacy of 
the precautions on this head. Where the whole power of the 
government is in the hands of the people, there is the less 
pretence for the use of violent remedies, in partial or occa- 
sional distempers of the State. The natural cure for an ill- 
administration, in a popular representative constitution, is a 
change of men. A guarantee by the national authority would 
be as much directed against the usurpations of rulers, as 
against the ferments and outrages of faction and sedition in 
the community." 

"We have thus far briefly enumerated some of the import- 
ant powers granted by the people of the United States in 
their sovereign capacity, to the present federal government. 
"We have endeavored to show that the people, having grant- 
ed certain powers to the general government, such powers 
are necessarily withdrawn from the several States by the peo- 
ple thereof for the purpose of establishing one grand central 
power, which, when exercised within its delegated authority, 
should be recognized as the supreme law of the land ; hence 
the people of the several States having to the extent of the 
powers granted, surrendered the separate State sovereignty, 
they became one grand, inseparable, sovereign and independ- 
ent nation. The very fact that each and every citizen of our 
entire country has a voice in controlling the policy of the 
general government, shows conclusively that they owe obe- 



HOW TO MKKT IT. 39 

dicnce to its enactments, consequently, our national laws arc 
alike binding upon every individual from Florida to Maine, 
and from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. 

But independent of our arguments, we have in the forego- 
irg pages presented copious extracts from letters Written by 
Messrs. Madison, Jay and Hamilton pending the adoption 
of the constitution, all of which must convince the most skep- 
tical, that all parties at that time understood that they were 
granting certain powers to the general government that could 
not thereafter be resumed and controlled by the various 
States. The able manner in which the importance of such 
an arrangement is argued, the clear and conclusive reason- 
ing, the contrasts drawn between one great and powerful 
nation and several petty, jealous, contending little sove- 
reignties, should cast into the shade the weak sophism that 
is palmed off by the political demagogues of the present day 
for the purpose of dividing the people, under the disguise of 
what is called State sovereignty. 

The arguments already advanced to show that we havo a 
national government whose authority is supreme throughout 
the length and breadth of this country, (State laws to the 
contrary notwithstanding.) should be sufficient to convince 
the most ultra States rights secessionist that his dogma is 
only a garbled name for treason. Nevertheless, we will now 
proceed to give in full the celebrated Proclamation issued to 
the nullifiers of South Carolina twenty-eight years ago by 
the hero of the battle of New Orleans, recommending its 
careful perusal by every American citizen who has a spark 
of patriotism left within him. Its noble, patriotic senti- 
ments will be found decidedly refreshing when contrasted 
with the crouching imbecility and indecision that has char- 
acterized not only James Buchanan hut many of our leading 
politicians in the present dangerous, suffering and distracted 
condition of our beloved country. 

General Jackson, a brave, daring, noble hero, knowing his 
duty, hastened to perform it in defiance of every obstacle ; ho 
resolves to save his country, at every hazard, from falling 
into the vortex of anarchy, ruin and disgrace. 

When the hydra-headed monster, treason, began to make 



40 THE CRISIS. 

its appearance, the honored son of Tennessee, whose name is 
held in reverence by every friend of liberty, whose memory 
will be honored as the savior of his country, actuated by a 
high sense of his duty, with true Uoruan firmness, standing 
upon the temple of liberty, proclaiming to the world that he 
will maintain the integrity of his country or perish while 
marching under its glorious banner warning the enemies of 
the Union, to pause and consider the awful consequences 
of persisting in their treasonable designs, and decide wheth- 
er they are prepai*ed to assume such a terrible responsi- 
bility. 

I will now give his proclamation in full, hoping that the 
spirit of patriotism, firmness and justice therein contained 
will cause a heartfelt response by my fellow countrymen. 



PRESIDENT'S PROCLAMATION. 



Proclamation of Andrew Jackson, President of the United States. 

Whereas, A convention assembled in the State of South 
Carolina have passed an ordinance, by which they declare 
"That the several acts and parts of acts of the congress of 
the United States, purporting to be laws for the imposing of 
duties and imposts on the importation of foreign commodi- 
ties, and now having actual operation and effect within the 
United States, and more especially," two acts for the same 
purposes passed on the 29th of May, 1828, and on the 14th 
of July, 1832, "are unauthorized by the constitution of the 
United States, and violate the true meaning and intent there- 
of, and are null and void, and no law," nor binding on the 
citizens of that State or its officers: aud by the said ordin- 
ance, it is further declared to be unlawful for any of the con- 
stituted authorities of the State or of the United States to 
enforce the payment of the duties imposed by the said acts 
within the same State, and that it is the duty of the Legisla- 
ture to pass such laws as may be necessary to give full effect 
to the said ordinance : 

And Whereas, By the said ordinance, it is further ordained 
that, in no case of law or equity decided in the courts of said 
State, wherein shall be drawn in question the validity of the 
said ordinance, or of the acts of the legislature that may be 
passed to give it effect, or of the said laws of the United 
States, no appeal shall be allowed to the Supreme Court of 
the United States, nor shall any copy of the record be per- 
mitted or allowed for that purpose, and that any person at- 
tempting to take such appeal shall be punished as for a con- 
tempt of court: 

And, finally, the said ordinance declares that the people of 
South Carolina will maintain the said ordinance at every 



42 THE CRISIS. 

hazard ; and that they will consider the passage of any act, 
by congress, abolishing or closing the ports of the said State, 
or otherwise obstructing the free ingress or egress of vessels 
to and from the said ports, or any other act of the Federal 
Government to coerce the State, shut up her ports, destroy 
or harrass her commerce, or to enforce the said acts other- 
wise than through the civil tribunals of the country, as in- 
consistant with the longer continuance of South Carolina in 
the Union, and that the people of the said State will thence- 
forth hold themselves absolved from all further obligation to 
maintain or jjreserve their political connection with the peo- 
ple of the other States, and will forthwith proceed to organ- 
ize a separate government, and do all other acts aud thing* 
which sovereign and independent States may of right do. 

And Whereas, the said ordinance prescribes to the people 
of South Carolina a course of conduct in direct violation of 
their duty as citizens of the United States, contrary to the 
laws of their country, subversive of its constitution, and hav- 
ing for its object tho destruction of the Union — that Union, 
which, coeval with our political existence, led our fathers, 
without any other ties to unite them than those of patriotism 
and a common cause, through a sanguinary struggle to a glo- 
rious independence — that sacred Union, hitherto inviolate, 
which, perfected by our happy constitution, has brought us, 
by the favor of Heaven, to a state of prosperity at home, and 
high consideration abroad, rarely, if ever, equalled in the 
history of nations. To preserve this bond of our political 
existence from destruction, to maintain inviolate this state of 
national honor and prosperity, and to justify the confidence 
my fellow citizens have reposed in me, I, Andrew Jackson, 
President of the United States, have thought proper to issue 
this my PEOCLAMATION, stating my views of the consti- 
tution and laws applicable to the measures adopted by the 
convention of South Carolina, and to the reasons they have 
put forth to sustain them, declaring the course which duty 
will require me to pursue, and, appealing to the understand- 
ing and patriotism of the people, warn them of the conse- 
quences that must inevitably result from an observance of the 
dictates of the convention. 



HOW TO MEKT IT. $8 

Strict duty would require of mc nothing more than the ex- 
ercise of those powers with which 1 am now, or may hereaf- 
ter be invested, for preserving the peace of the Union, and 
for the execution of tho laws. But the imposing aspect 
which opposition has assumed in this case, by clothing itself 
with State authority, and the deep interest which the people 
of the United States must all feel in preventing a resort to 
stronger measures, while there is a hope that anything will 
be yielded to reasoning and remonstrance, perhaps demand, 
and will certainly justify, a full exposition to South Carolina 
and the nation of the views I entertain of this important 
question, as well as a distinct enunciation of the course which 
ray sense of dxity will require me to pursue. 

The ordinance is founded, not on tho indefeasible right of 
resisting acts which arc plainly unconstitutional, and too op- 
pressive to bo endured; but on the strange position that any 
one State may not only declare an act of congress void, but 
prohibit its execution — that they may do this consistently 
with the constitution — that the true construction of that in- 
strument permits a State to retain its place in tho Union, and 
yet bo bound by no other of its laws than those it ma}- choose 
to consider as constitutional. It is true, they add, that to 
justify this abrogation of a law, it must be palpably contrary 
to the constitution ; but it is evident, that, to give the right 
of resisting laws of that description, coupled with the uncon- 
trolled right to decide what laws deserve that character, is to 
give the power of resisting all laws. For, as by the theory, 
there is no appeal, the reasons alleged by the State, good or 
bad must prevail. If it should be said that public opinion is 
a sufficient check against the abuse of this power, it may be 
asked why it is not deemed a sufficient guard against the 
passage of an unconstitutional act by congress? There is, 
however, a restraint in this last case, which makes the 
assumed power of a State more indefensible, and which does 
not exist in tho other. There are two appeals from an un- 
constitutional act passed by congress — one to the judiciary, 
the other to tho people and the States. There is no appeal 
from the State decision in theory, and the practical illastra- 
tion shows that the courts are closed against an application 



44 THE CRISIS. 

to review it, both judges and jurors being sworn to decide in 
its favor. But reasoning on this subject is superfluous, when 
our social compact, in express terms, declares that the laws 
of the United States, its constitution, and treaties made un- 
der it, are the supreme law of the land; and, for greater cau- 
tion, adds "that the judges in every State shall be bound 
thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to 
the contrary notwithstanding." And it may be asserted 
without fear of refutation, that no federal government could 
exist without a similar provision. Look for a moment to the 
consequence. If South Carolina considers the revenue laws 
unconstitutional, and has a right to prevent their execution 
in the port of Charleston, there would be a clear constitu- 
tional objection to their collection in every other port, and 
no revenue could be collected anywhere ; for all imposts must 
be equal. It is no answer to repeat, that an unconstitutional 
law is no law, so long as the question of its legality is to be 
decided by the State itself; for every law operating injuri- 
ously upon any local interest will be perhaps thought, and 
•certainly represented, as unconstitutional, and, as has been 
shown, there is no appeal. 

If this doctrine had been established at an earlier day, the 
Union would have been dissolved in its infancy. The excise 
law in Pennsylvania, the embargo and non-intercourse law 
in the eastern States, the carriage tax in Virginia, were all 
deemed unconstitutional, and were more equal in their ope- 
ration than any of the laws now complained of; but fortun- 
ately none of those States discovered that they had the right 
now claimed by South Carolina. The war into which we 
were forced to support the dignity of the nation and the 
rights of our citizens, might have ended in defeat and dis- 
grace instead of victory and honor, if the States who supposed 
it a ruinous and unconstitutional measure, had thought they 
possessed the right of nullifying the act by which it was de- 
clared, and denjnng supplies for its prosecution. Hardly and 
unequally as those measures bore upon several members of 
the Union, to the legislatures of none did this efficient and 
peaceable remedy, as it is called, suggest itself. The discov- 
ery of this important featui'e in our constitution was reserved 



HOW TO MKET IT. 49 

to the present day. To the statesmen of South Carolina b« 
longs the invent'on, and upon the citizens of that State will 
unfortunately fall the evils of reducing it to pfactioe. 

If the doctrine of a State veto upon the laws of the Union 
carries with it internal evidence of its impracticable absurdi- 
ty, our constitutional history will also afford abundant proof 
that it would have been repudiated with indignation, had it 
been proposed to form a feature in our Government. 

In our colonial state, although dependent on another power, 
we very early considered ourselves as connected by common 
interest with each other. Leagues were formed for common 
defence, and, before the declaration of independence, we 
were known in our aggregate character as the f'nited Colonies 
of America. That decisive and important step was taken 
jointly. We declared ourselves a nation by a joint, not by 
several acts, and when the terms of our confederation were 
reduced to form, it was in that of a solemn league of several 
States, by which they agreed that they would collectively 
form one nation for the purpose of conducting some certain 
domestic concerns and all foreign relations. In the instru- 
ment forming that Union is found an article which declares 
that " every State shall abide by the determinations of con- 
gress on all questions which, by that confederation, should be 
submitted to them." 

Under the confederation, then, no State could legally annul 
a decision of the congress, or refuse to submit to its execu- 
tion ; but no provision was made to enforce these decisions. 
Congress made requisitions, but they were not complied with. 
The government could not operate on individuals. They 
had no judiciary, no means of collecting revenue. 

But the defects of the confederation need not be detailed. 
Under its operation we could scarcely be called a nation. "We 
had neither prosperity at home nor consideration abroad. 
This state of things could not be endured, and our present 
happy constitution was formed, but formed in vain, if this 
fatal doctrine prevails. Tt was formed for important objects 
that are announced in the preamble made in the name and 
by the authority of the people of the United States, whose 
delegates framed, and whose conventions approved it. The 



46 THE CRISIS. 

most important among these objects, that which is placed 
first in the rank, on which all others rest, is, "to form a more 
perfect Union." Now, is it possible that even if there were 
no express provision giving supremacy to the constitution 
and laws of the United States over those of the States — can 
it be conceived, that an instrument made for the purpose of 
"forming a more perfect Union" than that of the confederation, 
could be so constructed by the assembled wisdom of our 
country as to substitute for that confederation a form of gov- 
ernment dependent for its existence on the local interest, the 
party spirit of a State, or of a prevailing faction in a State? 
Every man of plain, unsophisticated understanding, who 
hears the question, will give such an answer as will preserve 
the Union. Metaphysical subtlety, in pursuit of an imprac- 
ticable theory, could alone have devised one that is calculated 
to destro} T it. 

I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United 
States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of 
the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the constitution, 
unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on 
which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which 
it was formed. 

After this general view of the leading principle, we must 
examine the particular application of it which is made in the 
ordinance. 

The preamble rests its justification on these grounds: It 
assumes, as a fact, that the obnoxious laws, although they 
purport to be laws for raising revenue, were in reality in- 
tended for the protection of manufactures, which purpose it 
asserts to be unconstitutional; that the operation of these 
laws is unequal ; that the amount raised by them is greater 
than is required by the wants of the government; and, 
finally, that the proceeds are to be applied to objects unau- 
thorized by the constitution. These are the only causes 
alleged to justify an open opposition to the laws of the coun- 
try, and a threat of seceding from the Union, if any attempt 
should be made to enforce them. The first virtually acknowl- 
edges that the law in question was passed under a power ex- 
pressly given by the constitution to lay and collect imposts; 



HOW TO MEET IT. 47 

but its constitutionality is drawn in question from the motives 
of those who passed it. However apparent (his purpose may 
be in the present case, nothing can be more dangerous than 
to admit the position that an unconstitutional purpose, enter- 
tained by the members who assent to a law enacted under a 
constitutional power, shall make the law void : for how is 
that purpose to be ascertained? Who is to make the scru- 
tiny? How often may bad purposes be falsely imputed — in 
how many cases arc they concealed by false professions — in 
how many is no declaration of motive made? Admit this 
doctrine, and you give to the States an uncontrolled right to 
decide, and every law may be annulled under this pretext. 
If, therefore, the absurd and dangerous doctrine should be 
admitted, that a State may annul an unconstitutional law, or 
one that it deems such, it wdl not appl} T to the present case. 
The next objection is, that the laws in question operate un- 
equally. This objection may be made with truth to every 
law that has been or can be passed. The wisdom of man 
never yet contrived a system of taxation that would operate 
with perfect equality. If the unequal operation of a law 
makes its unconstitutional, and if all laws of that description 
may be abrogated by any State for that cause, then indeed 
is the Federal Constitution unworthy of the slightest effort 
for its preservation. We have hitherto relied on it as the 
perpetual bond of our Union. We have received it as the 
work of the assembled wisdom of the nation. We have trust- 
ed to it as to the sheet anchor of our safety in the stormy 
times of conflict with a foreign or domestic foe. We bare 
looked to it with sacred awe as the palladium of our liber- 
ties, and with all the solemnities of religion have pledged to 
each other our lives and fortunes here, and our hopes of hap- 
piness hereafter, in its defence and support. Were we mis- 
taken, my countrymen, in attaching this importance to the 
Constitution of our country? Was our devotion paid to the 
wretched, inefficient, clumsy, contrivance which this new 
doctrine would make it? Did we pledge ourselves to the sup- 
port of an airy nothing — a bubble that must be blown away 
by the first breath of disaffection ? Was this self-destroying, 
visionary theory, the work of the profound statesmen, the 



48 THE CRISIS. 

exalted patriots, to whom the task of constitutional reform 
was entrusted? Did the name of Washington sanction, did 
the States deliberately ratify such an anomaly in the history 
of fundamental legislation? No. We were not mistaken. 
The letter of this great instrument is free from this radical 
fault; its language directly contradicts the imputation; its 
spirit — its evident intent, contradicts it. No, we did not err! 
Our Constitution does not contain the absurdity of giving 
power to make laws, and another power to resist them. The 
sages whose memory will always be reverenced, have given 
us a practical, and, as they hoped, a permanent constitution- 
al compact. The Father of his Country did not affix his re- 
vered name to so palpable an absurdity. Nor did the States, 
when they severally ratified it, do so under the impression 
that a veto on the laws of the United States was reserved to 
them, or that they could exercise it by implication. Search 
the debates in all their Conventions, examine the speeches of 
the most zealous opposers of federal authority, look at the 
amendments that were proposed — they are all silent — not a 
syllable uttered, not a vote given, not a motion made, to cor- 
rect the explicit supremacy given to the laws of the Union 
over those of the States, or to show that implication, as is 
now contended, could defeat it. No, we have not erred ! The 
Constitution is still the object of our reverence, the bond of 
our Union, our defence in danger, the source of our prosper- 
ity in peace ; it shall descend as we have received it, uncor- 
rupted b}^ sophistical construction, to our posterity, and the 
sacrifices of local interest, of State prejudices, of personal 
animosities, that were made to bring it into existence, will 
again be patriotically offered for its support. 

The two remaining objections made by the ordinance to 
these laws, are that the sums intended to be raised by them 
are greater than are required, and that the proceeds will be 
unconstitutionally employed. 

The Constitution has given, expressly, to Congress the 
right of raising revenue, and of determining the sum the pub- 
lic exigencies will require. The States have no control over 
the exercise of this right other than that which results from 
feho power of changing the representatives who abuse it, and 



HOW TO MEET IT. I'.l 

thus procure redress. Congress may, undoubtedly, abuso 
this discretionary power ; but the same may lie said of others 
with which the}* are vested. Fet the discretion must exist some- 
where. The Constitution has given it to the representatives 
of all the people, checked by the representatives of the States, 
and by the Executive power. The South Carolina construc- 
tion gives it to the Legislature or the Convention of a single 
State, where neither the people of the different States, nor 
the States in their separate capacity, nor the Chief Magis- 
trate elected by the people, have any representation. Which 
is the most discreet disposition of the power? I do not ask 
you, fellow citizens, which is the constitutional disposition — 
that instrument speaks a language not to be misunderstood. 
But if you were assembled in general Convention, which 
would you think the safest depository of this discretionary 
power in the last resort? Would you add a clause giving it 
to each of the States, or would you sanction the wise provi- 
sions already made by your Constitution? It this should bo 
the result of your'dcliberations when providing for the fu- 
ture, are you, can you be ready, to risk all that we hold dear, 
to establish, for a temporary and a local purpose, that which 
you must acknowledge to be destructive, and even absurd, 
as a general provision? Carry out the consequences of this 
right vested in the different States, and you must perceive 
that the crisis your conduct presents at this day w r ould recur 
whenever any law of the United States displeased any of the 
States, and that we should soon cease to be a nation. 

The ordinance, with the same knowledge of the future that 
characterizes a former objection, tells you that the proceeds 
of the tax will be unconstitutionally applied. If this could 
be ascertained with certainty, the objection would, with more 
propriety, be reserved for the law so applying the proceeds, 
but surely cannot be urged against the laws lexying tho duty. 

These are the allegations contained in the ordinance. Ex- 
amine them seriously, my fellow-citizens; judge for your- 
selves. I appeal to you to determine whether they are so 
clear, so convincing, as to leave no doubt of their correctness; 
and even if }-ou should come to this conclusion, how far they 
justifj^the reckless, destructive course which you are directed 
4 



50 THE CRISIS. 

to pursue. Ecviow these objections, and the conclusions 
drawn from them, once more. What are they? Every law, 
then, for raising revenue, according to the South Carolina 
ordinance, may be rightfully annulled, unless it be so framed 
as no law ever will or can be framed. Congress have a right 
to pass laws for raising a revenue, and each State has a right 
to oppose their execution — two rights directly opposed to 
each other; and yet is this absurdity supposed to be contained 
in an instrument drawn for the express purpose of avoiding 
collisions between the States and the general government, by 
an assembly of the most enlightened statesmen and purest 
patriots ever embodied for a similar purpose. 

In vain have these sages declared that congress shall have 
power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; 
in vain have they provided that they shall have power to 
pass laws, which shall be necessary and proper to carry those 
powers into execution ; that those laws and that constitution 
shall be the "supreme law of the land, and that the judges 
in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the con- 
stitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstand- 
ing." In vain have the people of the several States solemnly 
sanctioned these provisions, made them their paramount law, 
and individually sworn to support them whenever they were 
called on to execute any office. Vain provisions ! ineffectual 
restrictions ! vile profanation of oaths ! miserable mockery 
of legislation ! if the bare majority of the voters in any one 
State may, on a real or supposed knowledge of the intent 
with which a law has been passed, declare themselves free 
from its operation — say here it gives too little, there too 
much, and operates unequally — here it suffers articles to be 
free that ought to bo taxed — there it taxes those that ought 
to be free — in this case the proceeds are intended to be applied 
to purposes which we do not approve — in that the amount 
raised is more than is wanted. Congress, it is true, are in- 
vostcd by the constitution with the right of deciding these 
questions according to their sound discretion ; congress is 
composed of the representatives of all the States, and of all 
the people of all the States ; but we, part of the people of 
one State, to whom the constitution has given no power on 
the subject, from whom it has expressly taken it away — we, 



How TO MEET IT. Bl 

who have solemnly agreed that this constitution shall be our 

law — we, most of whom have sworn to support it — wo now 
abrogate this law, and swear and force others to swear that 
it shall not be obeyed ; and we do this, not because congress 
have no right to pass such laws— this we do not allege — but 
because they have passed them with improper views. Tinw- 
are unconstitutional from the motives of those who passed 
them, which we can never with certainty know; from their 
unequal operation, although it is impossible, from the nature 
of things, that they should he equal ; and from the disposi- 
tion -which we presume may be made of their proceeds, 
although that disposition has not been declared. This is the 
plain meaning of the ordinance, in relation to laws which it 
abrogates tor alleged unconstitutionality. But it docs not 
stop there. It repeals, in express terms, an important part 
of the constitution itself, and of laws passed to give it effect, 
which have never been alleged to be unconstitutional. Tho 
constitution declares that the judicial powers of the United 
States extend to cases arising under the laws of the United 
States; and that such laws, the constitution, and treaties, 
shall be paramount to the State constitutions and laws. The 
Judiciary act prescribes the mod.- by which the case may be 
brought before a court of the United States b}' appeal, Avhcn 
a State tribunal shall decide against this provision of the con- 
stitution. The ordinance declares that there shall bo no ap- 
peal, makes the State law paramount to the constitution and 
laws of the United States, forces judges and jurors to swear 
that they will disregard their provil ions, and even makes it 
penal in a suitor to attempt relief by appeal. It further de- 
clares, that it shall not be lawful for the authorities of tho 
United States, or of that State, to enforce the payment of 
duties imposed by the revenue laws within its limits. 

Here is a law of the United States, not even pretended to 
be unconstitutional, repealed by the authority of a small ma- 
jority of the voters of a single State. Here is a provision of 
the constitution, which is solemnly abrogated by the same 
authority. 

On such expositions and reasonings, the ordinance grounds 
not only an assertion of the right to annul the laws, of wdiich 



52 THE CRISIS. 

it complains, but to enforce it by a threat of seceding from 
the Union, if any attempt is made to execute them. 

This right to secede is deduced from the nature of the con- 
stitution, "which they say is a compact between sovereign 
-States, who have preserved their whole sovereignty, and 
therefore are subject to no superior ; that because they made 
the compact, they can break it, when, in their opinion, it has 
been departed from by the other States. Fallacious as this 
course of reasoning is, it enlists State pride, and finds advo- 
cates in the honest prejudices of those, who have not studied 
the nature of our government sufficiently to see the radical 
error, on which it rests. 

The people of the United States formed the constitution, 
acting through the State legislatures in making the compact, 
to meet and discuss its provisions, and acting in separate con- 
ventions, when they ratified those provisions; but the terms 
used in its construction, show it to be a government, in which 
the people of all the States collectively are represented. We 
are one 'people in the choice of president and vice president. 
Here the States have no other agency, than to direct the 
mode in which the votes shall be given. The candidates 
having a majority of all the votes are chosen. The electors 
of a majority of States may have given their votes for one 
candidate, and yet another may be chosen. The people, then, 
and not the States, are represented in the executive branch. 

In the house of representatives there is this difference, that 
the people of one State do not, as in the case of president and 
vice president, all vote tfor the same officers. The people of 
all the States do not vote for all the members, each State elect- 
ing only its own representatives. But. this creates no mate- 
rial distinction. When chosen, they are all representatives 
of the United States, not representatives of the particular 
State from whence they come. They are paid by the United 
States, not by the State ; nor are they accountable to it for 
any act done in the performance of their legislative func- 
tions ; and however they may in pi-actice, as it is their duty 
to do, consult and prefer the interests of their particular 
constituents, when they come in conflict with any other par- 
tial or local interest, yet it is their first and highest duty, as 



HOW TO MKKT IT. 53 

a representative of tho United States, to promote the general 
good. 

The constitution of the United States, then, tonus a gov- 
ernment, not a league; and whether it bo formed by compact 
between the States, or in any other manner, its character is 
the same. It is a government, in which all tho people are 
represented, which operates directly on the people individu- 
al ly, not upon the Slates; they retained all the power they 
did not grant. But each State having expressly parted with 
so many powers, as to constitute jointly with the other States 
a single nation, cannot from that period possess any right to 
secede, because such secession does not break a league, but 
destroys the unity of a nation ; and any injury to that unity 
is not only a breach, which wr-uld result from the contraven- 
tion of a compact, but it is an offence against the whole 
Union. To say that any State may at pleasure secede from 
the Union, is to say that the United States arc not a nation ; 
because it would be a solecism to contend, that any part of a 
nation might dissolve rts connection with tho other parts, to 
their injury or ruin, without committing any offence. Seces- 
sion, like any other revolutionary act. may bo morally justi- 
fied by the extremity of oppression ; but to call it a constitu- 
tional right, is confounding the meaning of terms ; and can 
only be done through gross error, or to deceive those, who 
are willing to assert a right, but would pause before they 
made a revolution, or incur the penalties consequent on a 
failure. 

Because the Union was formed by compact, it is said tho 
parties to that compact may, when they feel themselves ag- 
grieved, depart from it; but it is precisely because it is a 
compact, that they cannot. A compact is an agreement, or 
binding obligation. It may. by its terms, have a sanction or 
penalty for its breach, or it may not. If it contains no sanc- 
tion, it may be broken with no other consequence than moral 
guilt; if" it have a sanction, then the breach incurs tho de- 
signated or implied penalty. A league between independent 
nations generally has no sanction, other than a moral ono ; 
or, if it should contain a penalt}', as there is no common su- 
perior, it cannot be enforced. A government, on tho con- 



54 THE CRISIS. 

trary, always has a saction, express or implied; and in our 
case, it is both necessarily implied, and expressly given. An 
attempt by force of arms to destroy a government, is an of- 
fence, by whatever means the constitutional compact may have 
been formed; and such government has the right, by the law of 
self-defence, to pass acts for punishing the offender, unless 
that right is modified, restrained, or resumed by the consti- 
tutional act. In our system, although it is modified in the 
case of treason, yet authority is expressly given to pass all 
laws necessary to carry its powers into effect, and under this 
grant provision has been made for punishing acts, which ob- 
struct the due administration of the laws. 

It would iseem superfluous to add anything to show the 
nature of that Union, which connects us ; but as erroneous 
opinions on this subject are the foundation of doctrines the 
most destructive to our peace, 1 must give some further de- 
velopment to my views on this subject. No one, fellow-citi- 
zens, has a higher reverence for the reserved rights of the 
States, than the magistrate, who now addresses you. No one 
would make greater personal sacrifices, or official exertions 
to defend them from violation ; but equal care must be taken 
to prevent, on their part, an improper interference with, or 
resumption of the rights they have vested in the nation. 
The line has not been so distinctly drawn, as to avoid doubts 
in some cases of the exercise of power. Men of the best in- 
tentions, and soundest views, may differ in their construction 
of some parts of the constitution ; but there are others, on 
which dispassionate reflection can leave no doubt. Of this 
nature appears to be the assumed right of secession. It rests, 
as we have seen, on the alleged undivided sovereignty of tho 
States, and on their having formed, in this sovereign capa- 
city, a compact, which is called the constitution, from which, 
because they made it, they have the right to secede. Both 
of these positions are erroneous, and some of the arguments 
to prove them so have been anticipated. 

The States severally have not retained their entire sov- 
ereignty. It has been shown, that, in becoming parts of a 
nation, not members of a league, they surrendered many of 
their essential parts of sovereignty. The right to make 



now re meet rr. 66 

treaties, declare war, levy taxes, exorcise exclusive judieial 
and legislative powers, wore all of them functions of sovereign 
power. The States, then, for all these purposes, were no 
longer sovereign. The allegiance of their citizens was trans- 
ferred, in the first instance, to the government of the United 
States; they became American citizens, and owed obedience 
to the constitution of the United States, and to laws made in 
conformity with the powers it vested in congress. This last 
position has not been, and cannot be denied. How, then, can 
that State bo said to be sovereign and independent whose 
citizens owe obedience to laws not made by it, and whose 
magistrates are sworn to disregard those laws when they 
come in conflict with those passed by another ? What shows 
conclusively that the States cannot be said to have reserved 
an undivided sovereignty, is, that they expressly ceded the 
right to punish treason, not treason against their separate 
power, but treason against the United States. Treason is an 
offence against sovereignty, and sovereignty must reside with 
the pow T er to punish it, But the reserved rights of the States 
are not less sacred because they have, for their common in- 
terest, made the general government the depository of these 
powers. 

The unity of our political character (as has been shown for 
another purpose) commenced with its very existence. Under 
the royal government we had no separate character : our 
opposition to its oppressions began as united colonies. We 
were the United States under the confederation, and the name 
was perpetuated, and the Union rendered more perfect by 
the federal constitution. In none of these stages did we con- 
eider ourselves in any other light than as forming one nation. 
Treaties and alliances were made in the name of all. Troops 
were raised for the joint defence. How, then, with all these 
proofs, that under all changes of our position we had, for 
designated purposes and with defined powers, created national 
governments; liow is it, that the most perfect of those several 
modes of union should now be considered as a mere league, 
that may be dissolved at pleasure? It is from an abuse of 
terms. "Compact" is used as synonymous with "league," 
although the true term is not employed, because it would at 



56 THE CRISIS. 

once show Iho fallacy of the reasoning. It would not do to 
say, that our constitution was only a league ; but it is labored 
to prove it a compact, (which in one sense it is,) and then to 
argue, that, as a league is a compact, every compact between 
nations must of course be a league, and that from such an 
engagement every sovereign power has a right to recede. 
But it has been shown, that in this sense the States are not 
sovereign, and that even if they were, and the national con- 
stitution had been formed by compact, there would be no 
right in anyone State to exonerate itself from its obligations. 

So obvious are the reasons, which forbid this secession, 
that it is necessary only to allude to them. The Union was 
formed for the benefit of all. It was produced by mutual 
sacrifices of interests and opinions. Can those sacrifices be 
recalled? Can the States, who magnanimously surrendered 
their title to the territories of the west, recall the grant? 
Will the inhabitants of the inland States agree to pay the 
duties, that may be imposed without their assent, by those on 
the Atlantic or the Gulf, for their own benefit? Shall there 
be a free port in one State, and onerous duties in another? 
No one believes, that any right exists, in a single State, to 
involve the others in these and countless other evils, contrary 
to the engagements solemnly made. Every one must see, 
that the other States, in self-defence, must oppose it at all 
hazards. 

These are the alternatives, that are presented by the con- 
vention : A repeal of all the acts for raising revenue, leaving 
the government without the means of support; or an acqui- 
escence in the dissolution of our Union by the secession of 
one of its members. When the first was proposed, it was 
known, that it could not be listened to for a moment. It was 
known, if force was applied to oppose the execution of the 
laws, that it must be repelled by force ; that congress could 
not, without involving itself in disgrace, and the country in 
ruin, accede to the proposition ; and yet, if this is not done 
on a given day, or if any attempt is made to execute tho 
laws, the State is, by the ordinance, declared to be out of the 
Union. The majority o/a convention assembled for the pur- 
pose ha^e dictated these terms, or rather this rejection of all 



HOW -30 MEET IT. f>7 

terms, in the name of the people of South Carolina. It fa 
true, that the governor of the State speaks o£ I be submission 

of their grievances to a convention of all tin' Slates, which, 
he says, they "sincerely and anxiously Beek and desire." Yet 
tins obvious and constitutional mode of obtaining the sense 
of the other States, on tho construction of the federal com- 
pact, and amending it if necessary, has never been attempted 
by those, who have urged tho State on to this destructive 
measure. The State might have proposed the call for a gen- 
eral convention to the other States ; and congress, if a suffi- 
cient number of them concurred, must have called it. But 
the first magistrate of South Carolina, when he expressed a 
hope, that, "on a review by congress and the functionaries <>f 
the general government of the merits of the controversy," 
such a convention will be accorded to them, must have 
known, that neither congress, nor any functionary of the 
general government, has authority to call such a convention, 
unless it be demanded by two-thirds of the States. This 
suggestion, then, is another instance of the reckless inatten- 
tion to the provisions of the constitution, with which this 
crisis has been madly hurried on ; or of tho attempt to per- 
suade the people, that a constitutional remedy had been 
sought and refused. If the legislature of South Carolina 
"anxiously desire" a general convention to consider their 
complaints, why have the}' not made application for it, in 
the way the constitution points out? The assertion, that they 
"earnestly seek" it, is completely negatived by the omission. 
This, then, is the position in which we stand. A small major- 
ity of the citizens of one State in the Union have elected 
delegates to a State Convention ; that Convention has or- 
dained that all the revenue laws of the United States must bo 
repealed, or that they are no longer a member of this Union. 
The Governor of that State has recommended to the Legis- 
lature the raising of an army to carry the secession into of- 
foct, and that ho may be empowered to give clearances to 
vessels in the name of the State. No act of violent opposi- 
tion to the laws has yet been committed, but such a state ol 
things is hourly apprehended; and it is the intent of this in- 
strument to proclaim, not only that the duty imposed on mo 



58 THE CRISIS. 

by the Constitution "to take cure that the laws be faithfully 
executed," shall be performed to the extent of the powers 
.already vested in me by law, or of such others as the wisdom 
of Congress shall devise and entrust to me for that purpose, 
but to warn the citizens of South Carolina who have been 
deluded into an opposition to the laws, of the danger they 
will incur by obedience to the illegal and disorganizing ordi- 
nance of the Convention ; to exhort those who have refused 
to support it to persevere in their determination to uphold 
the Constitution and laws of their country; and to point out 
to all the perilous situation into which the good people of 
that State have been led, and that the course they are urged 
to pursue is one of ruin and disgrace to the very State whose 
rights they affect to support. 

Fellow citizens of my native State, let me not only admon- 
ish you, as the First Magistrate of our common country, not 
tto incur the penalty of its laws, but use the influence that a 
father would over his children whom he saw rushing to cer- 
tain ruin. In that paternal language, with that paternal feel- 
ing, let me tell you, my countrymen, that you are deluded 
by men who are either deceived themselves, or wish to de- 
ceive you. Mark under what pretences you have been led 
on to the brink of insurrection and treason, on which you 
stand ! First, a diminution of the value of your staple com- 
modity, lowered by over production in other quarters, and 
the consequent diminution in the value of your Hands, were 
the sole effect of the tariff laws. 

The effect of those laws was confessedly injurious, but the 
evil was greatlj- exaggerated by the unfounded theory you 
were taught to believe, that its burthens were in proportion 
to your exports, not to your consumption of imported arti- 
cles. Your pride was roused b}' the assertion that a submis- 
sion to those laws was a state of vassalage, and that resist- 
ance to them was equal, in patriotic merit, to the opposition 
our fathers offered to the oppressive laws of Great Britain. 
You were told that this opposition might be peaceably — 
might be constitutionally made ; that 3 7 ou might enjoy aM the 
advantages of the Union, and bear none of its burthens. 
Eloquent appeals to your passions, to your State pride, to 



HOW TO MEET IT. r»;t 

your Dative eourago, bo your sense of red Injury, were used 

to prepare you for the period when the mask, which conceal- 
ed the hideous feature*; of disunion, should be taken off. It 
fell, and you were made to look with complacency on objects 

which, not long since, you would have regarded with horror. 
Look back to the arts which have brought you to this state 
— look forward to the consequences to which it must inevita- 
bly lead ! Look back to what was first told you as an induce- 
ment to enter into this dangerous course. The great politi- 
cal truth was repeated to you, that you had the revolution- 
ary right of resisting all laws that were palpably unconsti- 
tutional and intolerably oppressive ; it was added that the 
right to nullify a law rested on the same principle, but that 
it was a peaceable remedy ! This character which was given 
to it, made you receive, with too much confidence, the asser- 
tions that were made of the unconstitutionality of the law 
and its oppressive effects. Mark, my fellow citizens, that, by 
tho admission of your leaders, the unconstitutionality must 
he palpable, or it will not justify cither resistance or nullifi- 
cation ! What is the meaning of the word palpable^ in tho 
sense in which it is here used ? that which is apparent to every 
one; that which no man of ordinary intellect will fail to per- 
ceive. Is the unconstitutionality of these laws of that des- 
cription ? Let those among your leaders who once approved 
and advocated the principle of protective duties, answer the 
question; and let them choose whether they will be consid- 
ered as incapable, then, of perceiving that which must have 
been apparent to every man of common understanding, or 
as imposing upon your confidence, and endeavoring to mis- 
lead you now. In either case, they are unsafe guides in the 
perilous path they urge you to tread. Ponder well on this 
circumstance, and you will know how to appreciate the ex- 
aggerated language they address to you. They are not cham- 
pions of liberty emulating the fame of our revolutionary la- 
thers; nor are 3*ou an oppressed people, contending, as they 
repeat to you, against worse than colonial vassalage. 
. You are free members of a flourishing and happy Union. 
There is no settled design to oppress you. You have indeed 
felt the unequal operation of laws which may have been un- 



60 THE CRISIS-. 

wisely, not unconstitutionally passed; but that inequality 
must necessily be removed. At the very moment when you 
were madly urged on to the unfortunate course you have be- 
gun, a change in public opinion had commenced. The near- 
ly approaching payment of the public debt, and the conse- 
quent necessity of a diminution of duties, had already pro- 
duced a considerable reduction, and that, too, on some arti- 
cles of general consumption in your State. The importance 
of this change was underrated, and you were authoritatively 
told that no further alleviation of your burthens were to be 
expected at the very time when the condition of the country 
imperiously demanded such a modification of the duties as 
should reduce them to a just and equitable scale. But, as if 
apprehensive of the effect of this change in alla} T ing your dis- 
contents, you were precipitated into the tearful state in which 
you now find yourselves. 

I have urged you to look back to the means that were used 
to hurry you on to the position you have now assumed, and 
forward to the consequences it will produce. Something more 
is necessary. Contemplate the condition of that country of 
which you still form an important part. Consider its govern- 
ment uniting in one bond of common interest and general 
protection so many different States — giving to all their inhab- 
itants the proud title of American citizens, protecting their 
commerce, securing. their literature and their arts; facilitat- 
ing their intercommunication ; defending their frontiers ; and 
making their name respected in the remotest parts of the 
earth. Consider the extent of its territory; its increasing 
aid happy population ; its advance in arts, which render life 
agreeable; and the sciences, which elevate the mind! See 
education spreading the lights of religion, morality, and gen- 
eral information into every cottage in this wide extent of our 
Territories and States? Behold it as the asylum where the 
wretched and the oppressed find a refuge and support ! Look 
on this picture of happiness and honor, and say — ice, too, are 
citizens of America ! Carolina is one of these proud States — 
her arms have defended — her best blood has cemented this 
happy Union ! And then add, if you can, without horror 
and remorse, this happy Union we will dissolve ; this picture 



HOW TO MEET IT. 61 

of peace and prosperity we will deface; this free intercourse 
we will interrupt; these fertile fields we will deluge with 
blood; the protection of that glorious flag we renounce; the 
very name of Americans *we discard. And for what, mista- 
ken men — for what do you throw away these inestimable 
blessings? for what would you exchange your share in the 
advantages and honor of the Union ? For the dream of sep- 
arate independence — a dream interrupted by bloody conflicts 
with your neighbors, and a vile dependence on a foreign pow- 
er. If your leaders could succeed in establishing a separa- 
tion, what would be your situation '? Are you united at homo 
— are you free from the apprehension of civil discord, with 
all its fearful consequences? Do our neighboring republics, 
every day suffering some new revolution, or contending with 
some new insurrection — do the}' excite your envy? But the 
dictates of a high duty obliges me solemnly to announce that 
you cannot succeed. The laws of the United States must bo 
executed. I have no discretionary power on the subject — my 
duty is emphatically pronounced in the Constitution. Thoso 
who told 3-011 that you might peaceably prevent their execu- 
tion, deceived }-ou — they could not have been deceived them 
selves. They know that a forcible opposition could alone 
prevent the execution of the laws, and they know that such 
opposition must be repelled. Their object is disunion; but 
be not deceived b}' names ; disunion, by armed force, is trea- 
son. Are you really ready to incur its guilt? If you are, on 
the heads of the instigators of the act be the dreadful conse- 
quences — on their heads be the dishonor, but on yours may 
fall the punishment ; on your unhappy State will inevitably 
fall all the evils of the conflict 3-011 force upon the govern- 
ment of your country. It cannot accede to the mad project 
of disunion, of which you would be the first victims — its 
First Magistrate cannot, if lie would, avoid the performance 
of his duty; the consequences must be fearful for 3-011, dis- 
tressing to your fellow citizens here, and to the friends of 
good government throughout the world. Its enemies have 
beheld our prosperity with a vexation they could not con- 
ceal — it was a standing refutation of their slavish doctrines, 
and they will point to our discord with the triumph of ma- 



62* THE CRISIS. 

lignantjoy. It is yet in your power to. disappoint them. 
There is yet time to show that the descendants of the Pinck- 
neys, the Sumters, the Kutledgcs, and of the thousand other 
names which adorn the pages of your revolutionary history, 
will not abandon that Union, to support which so many of 
them fought, and bled, and died. 

I adjure you, as you honor their memory-^- as j'ou love the 
cause of freedom, to which they dedicated their lives — as you 
prize the peace of your country, the lives of its best citizens, 
and your own fair fame, to retrace your steps. Snatch from 
the archives of your State the disorganizing edict of its Con- 
vention — bid its members to re-assemble, and promulgate the 
decided expressions of your will to remain in the path which 
alone can conduct you to safety, prosperity, and honor. Tell 
them that, compared to disunion, all. other evils are light, be- 
cause that brings with it an accumulation of all. Declare 
that you will never take the field unless the star spangled 
banner of your country shall float over you ; that you will 
not be stigmatized when dead, and dishonored and scorned 
while you live, as the authors of the first attack on the Con- 
stitution of your country. Its destroyers you cannot be. 
You may disturb its peace — you may interrupt the course of 
its prosperity — you may cloud its reputation for stability, but 
its tranquility wdl be restored, its prosperity will return, and 
the stain upon its national character will be transferred, and. 
remain an eternal blot on tho memory of those who caused 
the disorder. 

Fellow citizens of the United States! The threat of un- 
hallowed disunion — the names of those once respected, by 
whom it is uttered — the array of military force to support it 
— denote the approach of a crisis in our affairs, on which tho 
continuance of our unexampled prosperity, our political ex- 
istence, and perhaps that of all free governments, may de- 
pend. The conjuncture demanded a free, a full, and explicit 
enunciation, not only of my intentions, but of my principles 
of action ; and as the claim was asserted of a right b}' a State 
to annul, the laws of the Union, and even to secede firom it at 
pleasure, a frank exposition of my opinions in relation to the 
origin and form of our government, and the construction J 



HOW TO MEKT IT. 63 

give to the instrument by which it was created, seemed to be 
proper. Having the fullest confidence in the justness of the 
legal and constitutional opinion of my duties, which has been 
expressed, I rely, with equal confidence, on \<>uv undivided 
support in my determination to execute the laws — to pro- 
serve the Union by all constitutional means — to arrest, if 
possible, by moderate but firm measures, the necessity of a 
recourse to force; and, if it he the. will of Heaven, that the 
recurrence of its primeval curse on man for the shedding of 
a brother's blood should fall upon our land, that it be not- 
called down by any offensive act on the part of the United 
States. 

Fellow-citizens! the momentous case is before you. Or* 
your undivided support of your government depends the de- 
cision of the great question it involves, whether your sacred 
Union will be preserved, and the blessings it secures to us as 
one people, shall be perpetuated. No one can doubt that 
the unanimity with which that decision will be expressed, 
will be such as to inspire new confidence in republican insti- 
tutions, and that the prudence, the wisdom, and the courage 
which it will bring to their defence, will transmit them unim- 
paired and invigorated to our children. 

May the great Ruler of Nations grant that the signal bless 
ings with which he has favored ours, may not, by the mad- 
ness of party or personal ambition, be disregarded and lost ; 
and may His wise providence bring those who have produced 
this crisis to sec their folly, before they feel the misery of 
civil strife, and inspire a returning veneration for that Union, 
which, if avc may dare to penetrate his designs, he has chosen 
as the only means of attaining the high destinies to which 
we may reasonably aspire. 

In testimony whereof, 1 have caused the seal of the United 
States to be hereunto affixed, having signed the same with 
my hand. 

Hone at the city of Washington, this 10th day of Decem- 
ber, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and 
thirty-two and of the independence of the United States the 
fifty-seventh. ANDREW JACKSON. 

By the President : 

EDW. LIVINGSTON-, Secretary of State 



64 THE CRISIS. 

Comment upon the imperishable document just quoted is 
entirely unnecessary. It speaks for itself in thundering tones 
that strikes terror to the traitor's heart. Mark the clear and 
lucid reasoning* the kind, paternal advice, the bold and 
manly warning that pervades this production, of the true, 
noble, honored patriot of the Hermitage. 

For the purpose of contrasting the administration of An- 
drew Jackson, during the convulsion of 1832-33, with that 
of James Buchanan, during our present similar condition, we 
will give a brief summary of the course pursued by the for- 
mer: 

On the 24th day of November, previous to the issuing of 
President Jackson's proclamation, South Carolina had. through 
her convention, effectually declared herself out of the Union, 
by an ordinance that was to take effect on the first day of 
February, 1833. The President, being apprehensive of trouble 
in collecting the duties imposed by congress in the various 
ports of South Carolina, and more especially at Charleston, 
dispatched, through his secretary of the treasury, Louis 
McLean, confidential orders of the most strict and positive 
character, to the collectors at the several ports of entry. 

He writes to James K. Prinkle, Esq., collector at Charles- 
ton, ordering him to use the utmost firmness and vigilcnce in 
seeing the laws promptly executed in every particular. Ho 

^Joseph Story, LL. D., although a most bitter political opponent of Gen. 
Jackson, in his commentaries on the constitution of the United States, thus 
refers to the proclamation: 

"While this sheet was passing through the press, President Jackson's 
proclamation of the 10th of December, 1832, concerning the recent ordin- 
ance of South Carolina on the subject of the tariff, appeared. That docu- 
ment contains a most elaborate view of several questions, which have been 
discussed in this and the preceding volume, especially respecting the 
supremacy of the laws of the Union; the right of the judiciary to decide 
upon the constitutionality of those laws; and the total repugnancy to the 
constitution of the modern doctrine of nullification asserted in that ordin- 
ance. As a State paper it is entitled to very high praise for the clearness, 
force and eloquence, with which it has defended the rights and powers of 
the national government. I gladly copy into these pages some of its im- 
portant passages, as among the ablest commentaries ever offered upon the 
constitution." 



HOW TO MEET IT. C5 

ordered the revenuo cutter Alert to proceed to Charleston, 
and, in writing to Mr. Prinkle, he says, you will, moreover, 
cause the officers of the cutter (showing that there were others 
at hand), under your direction, to hoard all vessels departing 
from the port of Charleston, and in case any shall ho found 
without having been regularly entered and cleared in the 
manner required hy law, to seize and detain the samo, to he 
prosecuted according to law. The number of assistants and 
employees were greatly increased, and every precaution taken 
to prevent a surprise. But as time rolled around South Car- 
olina, not having penetrated the purposes of President Jack- 
son sufficiently to understand his position, felt confident in 
her final success, and was defiant in her attitude. She began 
to collect her army that was to defeat the government of the 
United States. She had appealed to her sister States to aid 
her in sustaining her position. Dissatisfaction had already 
began to show itself in various other sections of tho country. 
The President beheld the dangers and felt the responsibility 
resting upon him, and on the 10th day of December he is- 
sued his Proclamation, declaring his unalterable purpose to 
enforce the laws and collect the duties, and above all to stand 
by the Constitution and the Union to the last, and warning 
those who were precipitating their country into a civil war 
to beware of the consequences and fearful responsibility they 
would incur by a continuance in their reckless course. 

But South Carolina had gone too far to be silenced by any 
ordinary means. She continued her preparations, still hop- 
ing that she could spread disaffection into other portions of 
the country sufficient to frighten the government into grant- 
ing her demands, and many of the true friends of the Union 
trembled for its safety, so wide-spread was the sympathy 
South Carolina had enlisted. Many members of Congress were 
ready with their measures of pacification, each anxious to 
become the instrument of settling the difficulty, and perhaps 
immortalize his name. The horrors of civil war were as free- 
ly discussed as at the present day. Numerous were those 
who w r ere ready and willing to sacrifice everything, even the 
dignity of the nation, to avert the dreadful calamity. Bat 
where was the brave Jackson? Die was at the helm of the 
5 



66 THE CRISIS. 

great ship of State, and although the storm was raging, and 
the billows threatening to engulf her or dash her to fragments 
on the inhospitable shore of anarchy, yet the brave old hero, 
with the Constitution for his guide and the God of liberty 
for his counselor, bid defiance to the mutineers who wore 
threateningly assembled around him. 

On the 16th day of December he sent a special message to 
Congress asking for additional legislation for the purpose of 
meeting the exigency, he reminding them of their sworn du- 
ty to protect the Constitution from every encroachment, and 
appealed to their patriotism, and urged them, as true Ameri- 
cans, to stand firmly by their country. Congress promptly 
responded to the call, and the President thus prepared con- 
tinued the collection of customs uninterruptedly, and pre- 
served the honor and dignity of the nation. 

South Carolina, after much blustering and threatening, qui- 
eted down, and it is to be hoped that many of the leaders of 
the rebellion lived to see the folly of their acts and the wis- 
dom of the President. 

But let us look for a moment at the course James Buchan- 
an has pursued. It is now over a year since men occupying 
hi<^h places in the government began to publicly avow their 
determination to destroy this government and involve all in 
one common ruin. Public speeches and the press of the 
country have all proclaimed the determination of certain par- 
tain parties to break up this Union. Conventions have been 
held and resolutions passed declaring certain States out of 
the Union. Arsenals have been seized, forts have been taken 
by bodies of armed men, public property confiscated, and an 
unarmed steamer, bearing the flag ot the nation, has been 
fired into for attempting to comply with government orders 

collectors of customs are arrested and tried for treason for 

performing their duty. The free navigation of the Missis- 
sippi is prevented ; American citizens are driven out of sev- 
eral of the States while peaceably attending to their legiti- 
mate business, and some of the more unfortunate have suf- 
fered tarring and feathering, whipping, scourging and even 
death at the hands of those acting under authority, or at 
least within the knowledge of the authorities of the several 



HOW TO MEET IT. C7 

States ; and yet, after all the enumerated outrages, sufficient 
to disgrace even the half-civilized nation of Morocco, not 
one word of unqualified rebuke has James Buchanan uttered 
against those committing these outrages, not only against our 
government but tho very name of humanity. Surrounded 
by treason in his own cabinet,* he has looked quietly on 
while his Secretary of War supplied the insurgents with gov- 
ernment arms. Open and defiant traitors have been his daily 
counselors, while his imbecile, undecided course gives no one 
confidence in his future policy. Treason is now openly and 
boldly perpetrated throughout at least one-third of the en- 
tire country without the least restraint from any source what- 
ever. 

If there is to be found within the pages of history whero 
the government of a great, powerful and prosperous nation 
suffered treason to spread over one-third of the entiro coun- 
try, coupled with the open and revolting acts of violence that 
have characterized this rebellion, without the first attempt to 
check its destructive progress, it is not within the rSngo of 
my knowledge. 

Although the grounds for argument to show that this gov- 
ernment was established by the people collcctivelyof the whole 
country, (and not by the several States, as claimed by some,) 
and that it can only be rightfully altered or abolished by a 
constitutional majority of the same power that established 
it, would seem to have been entirely gone over, nevertheless 
we propose to introduce the additional evidence of that no- 
ble, honored statesman, and able constitutional expounder, 
Daniel Webster. 

On the 21st day of January, 18o0, Mr. Haync delivered in 
the Senate of the United States a very ablo speech advocat- 
ing the right of the various States to nullify the laws of Con- 
gress in certain contingencies, or what might be more pro- 
perly called the South Carolina doctrine, embracing tho right 
to nullify tho laws of Congress, or declare herself out of the 
Union at pleasure. His speech was considered a complote 

* We are happy to say that within a few days he has dismissed some, and 
others, disgusted with their own acts, have withdrawn. 



68 THE CRISIS. 

succces by the advocates of his sentiments, and was thought 
by them an unanswerable vindication of those principles, 
and when Mr. Webster undertook the task of replying to Mr. 
Hayne, he was met with jeers by the friends of nullication; 
but as the volume of his reasoning began to unfold itself, all 
eyes were attentively turned toward the speaker. After 
proceeding to state the grounds upon which was founded the 
pretended right to nullify the acts of Congress, Mr. Webster 
said : 

" This leads us to inquire into the origin of this government 
and the source of its power. Whose agent is it? Is it the 
creature of the State legislatures, or the creature of the peo- 
ple? If the government of the United States be the agent 
of the State governments, then they may control it, provided 
they can agree in the manner of controlling it; if it is the 
agent of the people, then the people alone can control it, re- 
strain it, modify or reform it. It is observable enough, that 
the doctrine for which the honorable gentleman contends 
leads him to the necessity of maintaining, not only that this 
general government is the creature of the States, but that it 
is the creature of each of the States severally; so that each 
may assert the power, for itself, of determining whether it 
acts within the limits of its authority. It is the servant of 
four and twenty masters, of different wills and purposes ; 
and yet bound to obey all. This absurdit}- (for it seems no 
less) arises from a misconception as to the origin of this gov- 
ernment, and its true character. It is, sir, the people's con- 
stitution, the people's government; made for the people; 
made by the people ; and answerable to the people. The 
people of the United States have declared that this constitu- 
tion shall be the supreme law. We must either admit the 
proposition, or dispute their authority. The States are un- 
questionably sovereign, so far as their sovereignty is not 
affected by this supreme law. The State legislatures, as po- 
litical bodies, however sovereign, are yet not sovereign over, 
the people. So far as the people have given power to the j 
general government, so far the grant is unquestionably good, 
and the government holds of the people, and not of the State 



HOW to MEET IT. GO 

governments. We are all agents of the Bame supreme power, 
the people. The general government and the State govern 
ments derive their authority from the same BOuroe. N < ithor 
ean, in relation to the other, be called primary : though one 
is definite ami restricted, and the other general and residuary. 
"The national government possesses those powers which it 
ean be shown the people have conferred on it, and no more. 
All the rest belongs to the State governments, or to the peo- 
ple themselves. So far as the people have restrained State 
sovereignty by the expression of their will, in the constitu- 
tion of the United States, so far, it must be admitted, State 
sovereignty is cffeetually controlled. 1 do not contend that 
it is, or ought to be, controlled further. The sentiment to 
which I have referred propounds that State sovereignty is 
only to be controlled by its own 'feelings of justice; 1 that 
is to say, it is not to be controlled tit all ; for one who i« to 
follow his feelings, is under no legal control. Now, however 
men may think this ought to be, the fact is, that the peoplo 
of the United States have chosen to impose control on Stato 
sovereignties. The constitution has ordered the matter dif- 
ferently from what this opinion announces. To make war, 
for instance, is an exercise of sovereignty; but the constitu- 
tion declares that no State shall make war. To coin money 
is another exercise of sovereign power; but no State is at 
liberty to coin money. Again, the constitution says, that no 
sovereign State shall be so sovereign as to make a treaty. 
These prohibitions, it must be confessed, are a control on the 
State sovereignty of South Carolina, as well as of the other 
States, which does not arise 'from feelings of honorablo jus- 
tice.' Such an opinion, therefore, is in defiance of the plainest 
provisions of the constitution." 

Mr. Webster proceeded to investigate the South Carolina 
doctrine as it was then termed ; he referred to the resolutions 
of Pennsylvania and Kentucky declaring the tariff laws con- 
stitutional, while in South Carolina the same laws were de- 
clared to bo a palpable, deliberate usurpation of power by 
Congress; and in speaking of the absurdity ol allowing each 
State to decide in such cases, he said : 



70 THE CRISIS. 

" If there be no power to settle such questions, independent 
of either of the States, is not the whole Union a rope of sand? 
Are we not thrown back again precisely upon the old confed- 
eration ? 

"It is too plain to be argued. Four and twenty interpre- 
ters of constitutional law, each with a power to decide for 
itself, and none with authority to bind anybody else, and 
this constitutional law the only bond of their union ! What 
is such a state of things but a mere connection during pleas- 
ure, or, to use the praseology of the times, during feeling ? 
And that feeling, too, not the feeling of the people who estab- 
lished the constitution, but the feeling of the State govern- 
ments." 

In referring to remarks made by Mr. Hayne, concerning 
what Mr. Hillhouse should have said about not being bound 
to obey an unconstitutional law, Mr. Webster says : 

" He quotes that distinguished senator as saying, that in 
his judgment the embargo law was unconstitutional, and 
that, therefore, in his opinion, the people were not bound to 
obey it. 

"That, sir, is perfectly constitutional language. As uncon- 
stitutional law is not binding; but then it does not rest with a 
resolution or a law of a State legislature to decide whether an act 
of congress be or be not constitutional. An unconstitutional 
act of congress would not bind the people of this District al- 
though they have no legislature to interfere in their behalf; 
and, on the other hand, a constitutional law of congress does 
bind the citizens of every State, although all their legisla- 
tures should undertake to annul it, by act or resolution. The 
venerable Connecticut senator is a constitutional lawyer, of 
sound principles and enlarged knowledge ; a statesman prac- 
ticed and experienced, bred in the company of Washington, 
and holding just views upon the nature of our governments. 
He believed the embargo unconstitutional, and so did others ; 
but what then? Who did he suppose was to decide that 
question? The State legislature ? Certainly not. IS o such 
sentiment ever escaped his lips." 



HOW Til MKKT IT. 71 

Mr. "Webster went on to ask from whence this Bupposed 
right of the States came? Where did they gel the power to 

interfere with the laws of the Union? Ho contended thai 
the notion was founded in a misapprehension of the origin 
of this government and of the foundation on which it stands, 
I hold, said he, this to he a popular government, erected by 
the people, those who administer it responsible to the people, 
and itself capable of being amended and modified just as the 
people may choose it should be. 

'•It is as popular, just as truly omenating from the people, 
as the State governments. It is created for one purpose ; the 
State governments for another. It has its own powers; they 
have theirs. There is no more authority with them to airest 
the operation of a law of congress, than with congress to 
arrest the operation of their laws. We are here to adminis- 
ter a constitution emenating immediately from the people, 
and trusted by them to our administration. It is not the 
creature of the State governments. It is of no moment to 
the argument that certain acts of the State legislatures arc 
necessary to fill our seats in this body. That is not one of 
their original State powers, a part of the sovereignty of the 
State. It is a duty which the people, by the constitution 
itself, have imposed on the State legislatures, and which they 
might have left to be performed elsewhere, if they had seen 
fit. So they have loft the choice of president with electors ; 
but all this does not affect the proposition that this whole 
government — president, senate and house of representatives — 
is a popular government. It leaves it still all its popular 
character. The governor of a State (in some of the States) 
is chosen not directly by the people for the purpose of per- 
forming, among other duties, that of electing a governor. 
Is the government of the State on that account not a popular 
government? This government, sir, is the independent off- 
spring of the popular will. It is not the_creature of State 
legislatures ; nay, more, if the whole truth must be told, the 
people brought it into existence, established it. and have 
hitherto supported it, for the very purpose, amongst others. 
of imposing certain salutary restraints on State sovereignties. 



72 / THE CRISIS. 

The States cannot now make war; they cannot contract alli- 
ances ; they cannot make, each for itself, separate regulations 
of commerce; they cannot lay imposts; they cannot coin 
money. If this constitution, sir, be the creature of State 
legislatures, it must be admitted that it has obtained a strange 
control over the volition of its creators." 

Mr. Webster then proceeded to show that when the people 
erected this government they gave it a Constitution, and in 
that Constitution they enumerated the powers which they 
bestowed on it. That they had made it a limited govern- 
ment, and defined its authority and restrained it to the exer- 
cise of such powers as were granted, and all others were ro- 
eervcd to the States or the people. But they did not stop 
there, being aware that no Constitution could be so plainly 
written but what there would be a difference of opinion on 
the construction of some points, consequently the} r (the peo- 
ple) in order to avoid a recurrence of the difficulties experi- 
enced under the old confederacy and render the laws of Con- 
gress effective and binding upon all parties without applying 
to State authority, thus rendering the government complete 
within itself, declared the Constitution and the laws of the 
United States, made in pursuance thereof, should be the su- 
preme law of the land. In referring to the tribunal in which 
to decide questions arising under the Constitution, Mr Web- 
ster said : 

" But, sir, the people have wisely provided, in the constitu- 
tion itself, a proper, suitable mode and tribunal for settling 
questions of constitutional law. There are, in the constitu- 
tion, grants of powers to congress, and restrictions on those 
powers. There are also prohibitions on the States. Some 
authority must therefore necessarily exist, having the ulti- 
mate jurisdiction to fix and ascertain the interpretation of 
these grants, restrictions, and prohibitions. The constitution 
has itself pointed out, ordained, and established that author- 
ity. How has it accomplished this great and essential end? 
By declaring, sir, that 'the constitution and the laws of the 
United States, made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme 



FlOW TO MEKT IT. 73 

law of the land, anything in the constitution or laws of any 
State to the contrary notwithstanding. 1 

"This, sir, was the first great Btep. By this, the snprema 
cy of the constitution and laws of the United Slates is de- 
clared. The people so will it. No State law is to bo valid 
which comes in conflict with the constitution or any law of 
the United States. But who shall decide this question of in- 
terference? To whom lies the last appeal? This, sir, tho 
constitution itself decides also, by declaring 'that the judicial 
power shall, extend to all cases arising under the constitution and 
laics of the United States.' These two provisions, sir, cover 
the whole ground. They are, in truth, tho keystone of the 
arch. With these it is a government; without them it is a 
confederacy. In pursuance of these clear and express provis- 
ions, congress established, at its very first session, in the judi- 
cial act, a mode for carrying them into full effect, and for bring- 
ing all questions of constitutional power to the final decision 
of the supreme court. It then, sir, became a government. 
It then had the means of self-protection ; and but for this, it 
would, in all probability, have been now among things which 
are passed. Having constituted the government, and de- 
clared its powers, the people have further said, that since 
somebody must decide on the extent of these powers, tho 
government shall itself decide— subject always like other 
popular governments, to its responsibility to the people 
And now, sir, I repeat, how is it that a State legislature ac- 
quires any right to interfere? Who, or what, gives them the 
right to say to the people, 'We, who are your agents and 
servants for one purpose, will undertake to decide, that your 
other agents and servants, appointed by you for another 
purpose, have transcended the authority you gave them?' 
The reply would be, I think, not impertinent, 'Who made 
you a judge over another's servants. To their own masters 
they stand or fall.' " 

He then went on to show that a State could not make trea- 
son against the United States legal, and, says he, when I 
maintain these sentiments, I am but asserting the rights of 
the people; I state what they have declared and insisted on 



74 THE CRISIS. 

as their right to declare it. They have chosen to repose this 
power in the general government, and I think it my duty to 
support it like other Constitutional powers. 

In referring to the importance of having but one tribunal, 
whose decisions should be final — Sir, said he : 

" If we look to the general nature of the case, could any 
thing have been more preposterous than to have made a gov- 
ernment for the whole Union, and yet left its powers subject, 
not to one interpretation, but to thirteen or twenty-four in- 
terpretations? Instead of one tribunal, established by all, 
responsible to all, with power to decide for all, shall consti- 
tutional questions be left to four and twenty popular bodies, 
each at liberty to decide for itself, and none bound to respect 
the decisions of others ; and each at liberty, too, to give a 
new construction, on every new election of its own members? 
Would any thing, with such a principle in it, or rather with 
such a destitution of all principle, be fit to be called a gov- 
ernment? No, sir. It should not be denominated a consti- 
tution. It should be called, rather, a collection of topics for 
everlasting controversy ; heads of debate for a disputatious 
people. It would not be a government. It would not be ad- 
equate to any practical good, nor fit for any people to live 
under." 

Mr. Hayne, already overborne with the overwhelming and 
unanswerable arguments, was yet destined to receive the 
most cutting rebuke from his vanquisher. Mr. Webster said : 

" And now, Mr. President, let me run the honorable gen- 
tleman's doctrine a little into its practical application. Let 
us look at his probable modus operandi. If a thing can be 
done, an ingenious man can tell how it is to be done. Now, I 
wish to be informed how this State interference is to be put 
in practice. We will take the existing case of the tariff law. 
South Carolina is said to have made up her opinion upon it. If 
we do not repeal it, (as probably we shall not,) she will then 
apply to the case the remedy of her doctrine. She will, we 
must suppose, pass a law of her legislature, declaring the 



HOW TO MEET IT. 75 

several acts of congress, usually called the tariff laws, null 
and void, so far as they respect South Carolina, or the citizens 
thereof. So far, all is a paper transaction, and easy enough. 

But the collector at Charleston is collecting the duties im- 
posed by these tariff laws — ho, therefore, must be stopped. 
The collector will sieze the goods if the tariff duties are not 
paid. The State authorities will undertake their rescue: the 
marshal, with his posse, will conic to the collector's aid ; and 
here the contest begins. The militia of the State will be 
called out to sustain the nullifying act, They will march, 
sir, under a very gallant leader ; for I believe the honorable 
member himself commands the militia of that part of the 
State. He will raise the nullifying act on his standard, and 
spread it out as his banner. It will have a preamble, bear- 
ing that the tariff laws are palpable, deliberate, and danger- 
ous violations of the constitution. He wdl proceed, with his 
banner flying, to the custom house in Charleston — 

"all the while 
Sonorous metal blowing martial sounds." 

Arrived at the custom house, he will tell the collector that he 
must collect no more duties under any of the tariff laws. 
This he will be somewhat puzzled to say, by the way, with a 
grave countenance, considering what hand South Carolina 
herself had in that of 181G. But, sir, the collector would, 
probably, not desist at his bidding. Here would ensuo a 
pause ; for they say, that a certain stillness precedes the tem- 
pest. Before this military array should fall on custom house, 
collector, clerks, and all, it is very probable some of those 
composing it would request of their gallant commander-in- 
chief to be informed a little upon the point of law ; for they 
have doubtless a just respect for his opinions as a lawyer, as 
well as for his bravery as a soldier. They know he has read 
Blackstone and the constitution, as well as Turenne and Yau- 
ban. They would ask him, therefore, BOmething concerning 
their rights in this matter. They would inquire whether it 
was not somewhat dangerous to resist a law of the United 
States. What would be the nature of their offence, they 
would wish to learn, if they, by military force and array, re- 



76 THE CRISIS. 

sisted the execution in Carolina of a law of the United 
States, and it should turn out, after all, that the law was con- 
stitutional. He would answer, of course, treason. No law- 
yer could give any other reason. John Fries* he would tell 
them, had learned that some years ago. How, then, they 
would ask, do you propose to defend us ? We are not afraid 
of bullets, but treason has a way of taking people off that 
we do not much relish. How do you propose to defend us? 
' Look at my floating banner,' he would reply; ' see there the 
nullifying laic!' Is it your opinion, gallant commander, they 
would then say, that if we should be indicted for treason, 
that some floating banner of yours would make a good plea 
in bar? ' South Carolina is a sovereign State,' he would re- 
ply. That is true; but would the judge admit our plea? 
'These tariff laws,' he would repeat, 'are unconstitutional, 
palpably, deliberately, dangerously.' That all may be so; 
but if the tribunals should not happen to be of that opinion, 
shall we swing for it? We are ready to die for our country, 
but it is rather an awkward business, this dying without 
touching the ground. After all, this is a sort of hemp-tax, 
worse than any part of the tariff. 

"Mr. President, the honorable gentleman would be in a 
dilemma like that of another great general. He would have 
a knot before him which he could not untie. He must cut it 
with his sword. He must say to his followers, defend your- 
selves with your bayonets ; and this is war — civil war." 

Mr. Webster continued to show that to resist by force the 
execution of a law of the United States was treason, and that 
the Courts of the United States could take no notice of a 
State law to authorize persons to commit that grave crime. 
Said he, the common saying that a State cannot commit trea- 
son herself, is nothing to the purpose. Can it authorize others 
to do so? If John Fries* had produced an act of Pennsylva- 

* John Fries was a noted leader in -what was called the Whisky Rebel- 
lion, which became so formidable in 1704 that President Washington is- 
sued a proclamation exhorting all persons to desist from any proceedings 
tending to prevent the execution of the laws. This did not have the' de- 
sired effect, however, and it became necessary for the President to order 



HOW TO MEET IT. 77 

nia annulling the law of Congress, would it havo helped his 
case? Talk about it as we will, these doctrines go the whole 
length of revolution. They are incompatible with any peace- 
able administration of the government. They lead directly 

to disunion and civil commotion, and therefore it is, that at 
the commencement, when they arc first found to be main- 
tained by respectable men, and in a tangible form, that I en- 
ter my protest against them all. Mr Webster proceeded to 
show that the people of the United States have not chosen 
the State authorities as their guardians against encroachments 
from the general government. Said he : 

"Sir, the people have not trusted their safely, in regard to 
the general constitution, to those hands. They have required 
other security, and taken other bonds. They have chosen 
to trust themselves, first to the plain words of the instrument, 
and to such construction as the government, itself, in doubt- 
ful cases, should put on its own powers, under their oaths of 
office, and subject to their responsibility to them ; just as the 
people of a State trust their own State governments with a 
similar power. Secondly, they have reposed their trust in 
the efficacy of frequent elections, and in their own power to 
remove their own servants and agents, whenever they see 
cause. Thirdly, they have reposed trust in the judicial pow- 
er, which, in order that it might be trustworthy, they have 
made as respectable, as disinterested, and as independent as 
practicable. Fourthly, they have seen fit to rely, in case of 
necessity, or high expediency, on their known and admitted 
power to alter or amend the constitution, peaceably and qui- 
etly, whenever experience shall point out delicts or imper- 
fections. And finally, the people of the United States have 

out a strong force, numbering some 15,000 men. This argument seemed 
conclusive and convincing to the rebels of that day, consequently (hey re- 
turned to their several avocations, and by this means quiet was restored. 
But at that, time, as well at the present, there were numerous sympathizers 
with the traitors, which created a strong and powerful party against the 
administration of General Washington; but he knew his whole duty, and 
performed it unhesitatingly, regardless of the denunciations of those who 
were ever ready to excuse the turbulent for committing treason. 



78 THE CRISIS. 

at no time, in no way, directly or indirectly, authorized any 
State legislature to construe or interpret their instrument of 
government ; much less to interfere, by their own power, to 
arrest its course and operation. 

"If, sir, the people in these respects had done otherwise 
than they have done their constitution could neither have 
been preserved nor would it have been worth preserving. 
And if its plain provisions shall now be disregarded, and 
these new dectrines interpolated in it, it will become as fee- 
ble and helpless a being as enemies, whether early or more 
recent, could possibly desire. It will exist, in every State, 
but as a poor dependent on State permission. It must bor- 
row leave to be, and will be no longer than State pleasure, 
or State discretion sees fit to grant the indulgence and to pro- 
long its poor existence. 

" But, sir, although there are fears, there -arc hopes also. 
The people have preserved this their own chosen Constitu- 
tion for forty years, and seen their happiness, prosperity and 
renown grow with its growth, and strengthen with its strength. 
They are now generally strongly attached to it. Overthrown 
by direct assault, it cannot be; evaded, undermined, nullified 
it will not be, if we and those who succeed us here, as agents 
and representatives of the people shall conscientiously and 
vigilantly discharge the two great branches of our public 
trust faithfully to preserve and wisely to administer it." 

We believe that after perusing the evidence already ad- 
vanced, every reasonable, unprejudiced person must come to 
the conclusion that the fathers of our country established the 
government of the United States with the full understand- 
ing and intent that it should be supreme, so far as its dele- 
gated authority extended. That it was a unit and capable 
of sustaining itself by force, if necessary. Mr. Madison's 
views are repeatedly expressed on this point, explaining the 
advantages of conferring sufficient powers upon the general 
government to enable it to suppress internal violence and in- 
surrection, thus providing against the civil commotion that 
had overthrown other republics of a weaker and less binding 



HOW TO MEET IT. 79 

obligation on the part of the members composing them. Seo 
pages 24, 25 and 2G of this hook. Tho papers here referred 
to are the more important on account of being written while 
the question of adoption or rejection of the Constitution was 
being discussed before the people. Again, on pages 30 to 32, 
the defects and imperfections of tho old confederation in re- 
lation to tho principles of legislation for the States in their 
collective capacities, showing moro fully that the intention 
was to create a government for the people of the United States 
that should be binding on all persons, or combination of per- 
sous, for all time to come. And again, on page 34, is another 
quotation from tho joint production of Madison. Jay and 
Hamilton, showing that the government was expected to 
reach individuals without the aid. and independent of, Statu 
authority. And still another quotation, on pages :!;"> and 36, 
goes to show that there was a full understanding that tho 
people were conferring certain powers upon the general gov- 
ernment, and of course taking them from the States for tho 
purpose of forming one great, inseparable and indissoluble 
nation. There is not a particle of evidenco to prove that tho 
people contemplated reserving or recognizing any State dis- 
tinction or State sovereignty, so far as the powers of the gen- 
eral government were concerned ; but the whole drift of evi- 
dence goes to show that they were conscious of tin- necessity 
of uniting themselves under one grand government, making 
themselves one people, reserving only to the States or them- 
selves such powers as were thought necessary to regulate 
their local affairs, leaving the States in nearly the same rela- 
tion to the general government that a city municipality is to 
the government of the State in which it is located; but all 
must owe obedience to the government ol the Unit* d States. 
But this is not all the evidence wo have on this subject. 
As we review the history of the government, we find that 
Washington, Jackson, Webster, CMay, and in fact nearly eve- 
ry statesman of any prominence in our political history have 
either by their acts or words committed themselves to this 
same policy. The proclamation of General Jackson, and the 
extracts given of Mr. Webster's arguments, are the key -8 tone 



80 THE CRISIS. 

to the arch; they are both conclusive in themselves, and 
comment by me would be but a weak advocate of their mas 
terly and unanswerable arguments, hence I close the subject, 
conscious of having proven to the satisfaction of m} r self at 
least, and, I trust, to some of my doubting Democrtic friends 
and weak-hearted Kepublican brethren, that we at least have 
a government, established by our forefathers, constituting us 
one nation, one people, with one common country and desti- 
ny. Whether we shall be found brave enough to defend it and 
perpetuate it is a question which the God of nations only 
knows, and time alone will reveal to man. 



THE UNION. 



Shall this Union be maintained, or shall ii be dissolved ? 
are questions that arc the all absorbing topics of converse 
tion amongst all classes of people, through the length and 
breadth of our entire country. There seems to be a great 
lack of firmness and decision at this time, in relation to Im- 
proper course to be pursued in view of the momentous ques- 
tion now about to be presented, discussed and decided upon 
•by the American people. 

While true men are thus dumfounded and amazed; I might 
say silenced with almost a paralyzing astonishment at the 
daring and rapid movements of the internal enemies to our 
country; the eyes of the civilized world arc turned towards 
us, and every true friend of liberty and human progression is 
awaiting our decision upon this grave question, with an al- 
most breathless suspense. Jn view of this state of things 
what course shall we pursue in order to acquit ourselves 
honarably and preserve our nation from the ruin that seems 
threatening to blot out the only guarantee that there is such 
a government as "The United States?" There can he hut 
one answer to this from every true American patriot, and 
that is, that every attempt to break up this government let 
it come from few or many, will be met. he the consequences 
what they may. The integrity of this Onion must and 
shall be maintained, should be the watch word of cvcr\' 
man, woman and child that values the blessing ( >f liberty 
under which we have prospered as individuals and as a na- 
tion. It is contended by some that it is better to allow those 
States that choose to secede to go in peace than to enter into 
a civil war, the end of which no man can foretell. This 
would look very plausible were it not that there is a princi- 
ple at stake which is at the very foundation of every Demo 
6 



THE CRISIS. 



cratic government, and without the maintenance of this vital 
principle self-government is but a farce and a deception. 
And what is this principle? Why it is nothing more nor 
less than compelling the minority to submit to the constitu- 
tional acts of the majority. Now, who will pretend that a 
Democratic government can be sustained without this princi- 
ple is both recognized and, if necessary, enforced ? 

I am not one of those who think that the question of slavery 
is the great and only cause of our present troubles; far from 
it, you may banish every vestige of slavery from our coun- 
try, and other differences of opinion will rise up, and cause 
other disputes equally as difficult to settle. Nor is the extent 
of our country, or the variety of the climate to be charged 
with our difficulties, for even in our city and State elections 
we find there is a wide difference of opinion, which results in 
crimination and recrimination. The same will be found in 
the various school districts and in many of the churches. 
Where ever there is a government there must and will be a 
difference of opinion. It is not to be expected that we will 
all agree in relation to the various schemes that are presented 
from time to time for our consideration. But shall we revolt 
and overthrow the government because our pet scheme is 
defeated ? If not, then should we allow others to involve us 
in one common ruin because of their defeat? There w r ould 
be no end to this rebellious spirit if the obligation to submit 
to a constitutional election was removed. What would be 
the result of giving wa} T to those who are now threatening 
our peace? Would not every other community have the 
same right ; and we having once granted the right by allow- 
ing a portion of the nation to set up an independent govern- 
ment, how could we in justice punish those who choose to go 
and do likewise ? State governments will have the same 
difficulty to contend against that the United States have 
now, and instead of strength and prosperity we will be weak 
and divided and without honor at home or abroad. 

1 think that every sane man will agree with me when I say 
that it is much better to meet on one grand battle field and 
settle this question at once than to dodge the responsibility 
for the present, only to allow dissention to spread broad east 



nOW TO MKET IT. 

over the hind. When this great nation baa been torn into 
fragments by this ranting, ungovernable spirit, we, <>r our 
children, will have to enforce this great principle, thai some 
of our best meaning friends are willing to abandon for the 

sake of peace. 

THE EFFECT OF A WAR TO SUSTAIN OUR GOVERNMENT. 

The effect of a war to sustain our government would be to 
plant the seed of true patriotism in the breast of every law- 
abiding- and liberty-loving citizen of America. Wo should 

be able to contrast the two extremes of our unheard <>i' pros- 
perity and the miseries and horrors of civil war — which of 
itself would do much towards insuring peace for centuries to 
come. Let those who expect that we love peace so well, or 
dread war so much as to allow them to bid defiance to all 
laws, learn that they are mistaken; that we are not the 
degenerate sons of a noble ancestry, but knowing our rights 
and loving our country, we are determined to defend thei i 
against every encroachment, and we will hear no nine threats 
about disunion or rebellion in consequence of a political de- 
feat. We shall then have established beyond a controversy 
that the minority must and shall submit to (he constitutional 
acts of the majority. We will then have established in tie 
minds of the civilized world that our government is not 
one of straw, but that it is not ouly capable of vindicating 
its honor in defiance of foreign foes, but it is equally able to 
chastise those who rebel against its authority at home. War 
would be to our political system, what the thunderstorm is 
to the atmosphere. Its purifjdng influences would be mani 
tested by inspiring new life, vigor and purity into everything 
that surrounds us. Political demagogues will be cast aside 
as unfit for public confidence, and better and more patriotic 
men will spring up from among the masses who will have 
before them the history of the troubles through which their 
country has passed as lesson and a warning to shun a like 
calamity. 

We have heretofore shown ourselves to be equal to our 
undertakings, and now when the great crisis in our national 
affairs is at hand, and the eyes of the friends of liberty 



Si THE CRISIS. 

throughout the civilized world are gazing upon us with the 
deepest anxiety, shall we be found unworthy of the liber- 
ties wo enjoy? Should we be found unfaithful to the trust 
imposed on us by our forefathers? We would be the just 
object of scorn and contempt, and the historian who shall 
undertake the task of writing the true history of the rise 
and fall of the American government, will have the painful 
duty of drawing the. contrast between the noble and patriotic 
heroes who established it, and the cowardly, selfish and un- 
principled traitors who became its destroyers. 

SHALL THE PEOPLE RULE ? 

This question is frequently asked by those who arc en- 
couraging the Southern rebellion. I answer, most emphati- 
cally, in the affirmative. But let us see who the people are. 
It is plain that the people of a State are not those of one or 
more of the counties, unless the people of those counties are 
a majority of all the people in the State. Now the Consti- 
tution of the United States comes from the people of all the 
States, consequently it will be perceived that they alone and 
not the people of one State have the right to alter or abolish 
it. As well might the people of Indianapolis declare the 
Constitution of the the State of Indiana null and void, as for 
the people of one State to declare this Union dissolved. It 
is true that men talk about "States' rights," "the equality 
of the States," and in fact invent every manner of argument 
for the purpose of shielding those who are committing trea- 
son against the government of the United States, but where 
is the clause of the constitution that discloses any such sen- 
timents? There is none, but on the other hand we find the 
most positive proof that the framers of that article intended 
that we should be one great nation, and to secure us against 
the liability of sudden and unnecessary changes they pro- 
vided that in order to amend the constitution the consent of 
three-fourths of all the States were necessary, hence it will 
be perceived that a simple majority of the people of the 
United States could not amend the constitution, much less 
declare it null and void. 






HOW TO MKKT IT. 85 

In view of this wise provision so necessary to secure sta- 
bility to our government, how rediculous it is to talk about a 
single State declaring this Union dissolved against the well- 
known wish of four-fifths of all the people of our entire 
country. The thing is absurd in the extreme and should not 
be entertained for a moment, for such a principle once estab- 
lished would be the end of all constitutional governments. 
But suppose wo grant the independence of such States as 
choose to withdraw from the Union. In order to do this we 
must amend the constitution bo as to empower Congress to 
aet upon the matter, and until then, every member of Con- 
gress is bound to stand by the constitution as it is, for there 
is no power granted them to treat with a portion of this 
nation as an independent sovereign power. The framers of 
the Constitution did not grant Congress any more than a. 
State the right to dismember or dissolve the Union. And who 
would for a moment consent to the assumption of such extra- 
ordinary and important authority by those who were sent to 
Washington to support the very constitution which the}- are 
now called upon to disregard and destroy. 

WHAT SHOULD THE PEOPLE DO TO AVERT THE THREATENING 

STORM ? 

In my opinion, the best way to stop this disunion and 
treasonable clamor, is for all friends of the Union to come 
out and call meet'ngs, and pass resolutions such as are appro- 
priate for the times, telling our enemies that it was for this 
Union our fathers fought, bled and died, and we -will do (if 
necessary) as our fathers did. Let there be but one senti- 
ment, and the unbroken ranks of eighteen millions of free- 
men will do more to silence treason than all the constitutional 
amendments that could be prepared by twice the number oi 
pacificators that are now offering their services to induce the 
government to meet the traitors on what is termed "middle 
ground." It is this continued wavering and uncertain posi- 
tion of the people that give those who are plotting our de- 
struction such full and perfect confidence in their final suc- 
cess. Few men could be found who would enter the eneniiea 
ranks, if the certainty of being dealt with according to the 



R6 THE CRISIS. 

laws of onr country was before them. The boasted bravery 
of those chivalrous gentlemen who are now firing the hearts 
of the ignorant with bitter hatred against the noblest gov- 
ernment on earth, would hesitate, reflect, and recoil at the 
sight of the hangman and the gallows. I question not their 
bravery, neither do I doubt their determination, but with 
the certainty of defeat before them, would they strike the 
fatal blow ? Every sane man is apt to count the chances of 
success when he enters upon any very important undertaking, 
and if there is nothing before him but humiliation and defeat, 
where is the man who would be found fool hardy enough to 
risk his life in such a hopeless enterprise? They arc few and 
far between. "We are told that unless the nation gives way 
to these traitors, that the war that will ensue will be the 
most bloody and desperate ever known to civilized man. 
There is no doubt but they will fight, but will they be found 
any more brave and determined in destroying than we will 
be in maintaining our glorious country? I presume not. 
Then we can easily discovery the character of the war by 
deciding upon the course we would pursue in such a contin- 
gency. This talk about such a war being any worse than 
other wars, is a mere bugbear, sent out to frighten the timid 
into submission, and the less notice there is taken ot it, the 
more unfrequent will it be referred to. It is a noticable 
fact, that those who are bringing about this great calamity 
are the very ones who are picturing to our visions the horri 
ble consequences that would result from an effort to stop 
their career. Can impudence go further? Could Arnold 
have done more to have accomplished his base and ignoble 
purpose? 

Then let the friends of our country rally under its banner, 
and then and there resolve anew to stand by this Union as 
the only safety for our peace, our prosperity, and our liberties. 
There should be no partizan prejudice, for it is not the ques- 
tion who shall rule the country, but whether we shall have a 
country to rule. We all have a common interest in preserv- 
ing this government, and none should wait for this or that 
politician, for they are all waiting to see the determination 
of the people before the}- will take a very decided stand. 



HOW TO MEET IT. S7 

Nor can tho politicians alum- save our count ry. Par from it. 
They arc the parties who aided in bringing about our ["re- 
sent political troubles which arc threatening to involve as in 
a deadly contest to save our conn try from dissolution. As 
well might you prescribe arsenic and expect it to cure a 
patient who was threatened with death from the excessive 
use of that poisonous drug, as to look to the politicians to 
restore peace and prosperity to our distracted country. 

Since it is the people that must save our country, if saved 
at all, let there be unanimity, firmness and decision upon the 
all important question of preserving the Union; not if wo 
can carry out our pet scheme; not if South Carolina is 
willing. Neither should we make any other condition, hut 
resolve unalterably to stand by the constitution and the laws 
to the end, and never for one moment think of abandoning 
our undertaking, until this noble object shall have been ac- 
complished. It is a duty that we owe to ourselves, to our 
homes and firesides, to the friends of freedom throughout 
the civilized world, to those who are plotting treason against 
our government, and to tho God of liberty, that we should 
speak out plainly and to the point, and warn those who are 
expecting such an easy victory, that they are sadly and 
seriously mistaken; that we are not, as has keen repre- 
sented to them, divided, but we are as one man for our coun- 
try, unconditionally and unalterably, and though we may 
difier in relation to the policy of conducting the great ship of 
state, yet we will not abandon her, nor allow others to com- 
mit depredations against her. The people of this great nation 
will never consent to a peaceable distraction of this noble 
fabric. Never! never! no. never! Then should we cot warn 
those who are expecting an easy victory, against the awful 
consequences of a persistence in their destructive policy? 
By our silence we encourage them, by our inactivity we 
strengthen them, and by our indecision we give them con- 
fidence. The policy to be pursued should be distinctly laid 
down and presented to them. They have keen deceived and 
encouraged with the prospecl of success by the course we 
have pursued, and should war become necessary in order to 
enforce the laws, we are culpable, in a measure, for not show- 



88 THE CRISIS. 

ing more firmness at an earlier period. There is no room to 
doubt their determination to bid defiance to the constitution 
and the laws of the land, and nothing short of a show of the 
ability and the determination to stand b} r our country, will 
induce them to desist. It may now be too late to avoid 
bloodshed, but the sooner the remedy the less severe will be 
the calamity. 

We are told that to stir this matter up at the north will 
onl}' excite and spread the feeling of dissatisfaction more 
swiftly over the land, but the time has come when, to my 
mind, we must prepare to decide between our national exist- 
ence or non-existence. And should we be afraid of offending 
the enemies of our country? Those who would turn against 
the government, provided their peculiar notions in relation to 
some particular question is rejected, are against the whole 
spirit of a democratic government, and will he found against 
us in the end, and we may as well count them there first as 
last. A submission to their dictation would be to yield the 
reins of government into the hands of those who are deter- 
mined to either rule or ruin, which must evidently result in 
the latter. 

Let us examine the bearing of this rule or ruin policy, and 
see where it would end, provided we give way to those who 
choose to adopt it. I know of no better example, to test its 
destructiveness, than the one presented to us in the present 
unsettled condition of our country. The people have elected 
a President and Vice President in strict conformity with the 
provisions of the constitution, made and provided for that 
purpose. Of this there is no dispute. There is no use in 
talking about the issue being sectional, for every person who 
was legally entitled to vote for President and Vice President 
of the United States, and who concurred with the sentiments 
of the party, was invited to take part in the election. There 
was no distinction between North and South in this matter, 
and the plea set forth that there was no support from one- 
half of the country, does not alter the case, especially since 
it is well known that the political opponents of Mr. Lincoln 
would not allow the free discussion of the various issues pre- 
sented to the people for their consideration. Had this course 






now To MEET ii. 89 

been purbued in the North, there would not b«ve been ft 
Breckenridge party in many of the Northern States. Jt will 
be perceived, that owing to this intolerant spirit exhibited in 
some portions of the South, Mr. Lincoln's views were not, 
and could not be presented to the people for their consider- 
ation, which is in itself entirely inconsistent with the Bpiritof 
a free government, as well as a violation oi the constitution 
and laws of our country. But who was bo blame for this spirit 
of monocracy? Wasil Mr. Lincoln or hisfriends? Nothing 
but a bigoted blindness could lead any reasonable and well 
informed man to an affirmative conclusion. The simple fact 
that Mr. Yancey, the leader of the most ultra opponents of 
the Republicans, was allowed to advocate his views all over 
the North without molestation or even insult, proves to the 
contrary. But we are told that the Republican principles 
are contrary to Southern interests. What if they are? Is 
that a reason why the right of free discussion should be blot- 
ted out of existence? The principles of Mr. Yancey arc 
thought by a large majority of the people of the free States, 
to be decidedly against the interest of the whole country. 

But did they propose to destroy this government if Mr. 
Breckenridge was elected? Did they insult him, or drive 
him from the country as a felon? No, he was kindly treated 
and listened to. The people, however, did not conclude to 
vote his principles, and for this they are treated as criminals 
of the deepest dye. Comment is uiuiecesxiry. But supposing 
-Mr. Breckenridge had been elected, and Massachusetts had 
placed herself in the unenviable position that South Carolina 
has assumed, where is the statesman who would have advo- 
cated the justice of her position, or her right to secede, and 
thereby break up this government, unless .Mr. Breckenridge 
would renounce his doctrine, and propose a change in the 
constitution recognizing the Republican principles, and who 
would be found willing to compromise the honor and dignity 
of the government by conceding to Buch demands? [f any 
there be who would lend their aid to such a scheme, they are 
mere political demagogues without honor, and are not en- 
titled to the confidence of the people. In this, I presume, 
nearly every person will agree with me. Still, when we turn 



90 THE CRISIS. 

to the South, there seems to be some diversity of opinion in 
relation to what course should be pursued. Now, why this 
difference ? Can it be charged to anything but political prej- 
udices? True patriotism never begets sueh inconsistencies. 

Now it is plain that if any party make it a condition that 
they must be allowed to control this government, in order to 
allow us to live in peace, then that party, above all things, 
should not be allowed such control. The mere demand shows 
the incompetency of such party to occupy such an important 
position in our national affairs. Suppose Ave should grant the 
present request. Are we prepared to grant the next that 
may be made at any future time? If so, tell me, if you 
please, when and where }"Ou will be willing to make a stand 
fur the vindication of our constitutional rights'? Are we to 
give way to one demand after another until we have trans- 
ferred all the rights which we now possess to this rule or 
ruin part}-? 

It is contended by some that, by allowing those States 
which desire to secede from this Union, to go without opposi- 
tion, it will insure us peace, and at the same time remove the 
slave question from congress, and, thereby, our political 
troubles are at an end. Happy man is he who can imagine 
such a political millennium so near at hand, and so easily to 
be obtained. I would ask whether other questions may not 
come up that will divide the people, and cause the same bit- 
ter feeling that now distracts the whole country when 
another section will demand a separation from the remaining 
States; and whether they will not have the same right that 
we are now called upon to grant to th<* Cotton States? It is 
plain to me that if this policy, of allowing any State to se- 
cede that can raise a pretext for doing so, is to be adopted, 
we will soon have no government at all ; but in the place of 
this law-abiding and liberty loving community, where peace, 
plenty and prosperity has smiled upon us so many happy 
years, anarchy will reign, with all its blasting and withering 
influences, laying waste our brightest hopes, and casting a 
gloom and dispair over everything that has heretofore been 
the pride of every true American citizen. We are now called 
upon to consent to divide this nation under the penalty of 



HOW TO MEET IT. !M 

civil war; the horrors of which we all deeply deplore, and 

arc willing to prevent by all reasonable measures. But, can 
we grant what is asked withoul establishing a precedenl thai 
will lead to further demands, and a consequent Bub-division, 

and, in fact, division after division until this glorious and 
prosperous country shall be (instead of one great, powerful 

and honored nation.) thirty-three petty contending States, 
each striving tog< t the advantage &J the other? It is contend- 
ed by sonic that, by making concessions, both war and d 
lution can be proventcd. But, let us look at their character, 
and the circumstances under which they are demanded, and 
see whether such results, under existing circumstances, are 
likely to be realized. 

The people of the United States have just cast their votes 
in accordance with the usages and customs heretofore adopted, 
as well as in perfect conformity with their constitutional 
rights, and, as usual in such cases, there has been more than 
one party. The result has been that one party elected their 
choice, while the others were necessarily unsuccessful : and 
instead of submitting, like true patriots, peaceably to Un- 
constitutional acts of the people, a portion of the defeated 
party demand of those who have, by their numbers, carried 
the election, the surrender of their principles. This is the 
basis of the compromise that the freemen of this nation are 
unblushing!}" asked to make. But. upon inquiry as to wheth- 
er said conditional rebels (for they are nothing else arc wil- 
ling to aid in suppressing the more ultra and unconditional 
rebels of such States that have already d< clared t hei use Ives out 
of the Union, we find them bitterly opposed to everything 
that tends to show the supremacy of the laws over this 
traitorous secession dogma; and our candid opinion is, that 
eveiy individual who places himself upon this platform, is 
contemplating a deep laid scheme for the purpose of obtain- 
ing all the public territory they possibly can for the institu- 
tion of slavery, and then withdraw from the Union with 
their booty. Ask them if they are willing to submit in case 
the people reject their demands, and the answer is, no. they 
will die first. Thus the ultimatum is presented to us to either 



92 THE CRISIS. 

surrender our principles, out- country, or fight to sustain it. 
Fellow-countrymen we need not ask you which you will do. 

Let us sift this unparalleled scheme of impudence and see 
whether it is going to be productive of permanent good 
to an} T one except to those who are desirous of involving us 
in anarchy and ruin. 

Supposing the Eepublicans should abandon their princi- 
ples, which seem to be the terms upon which peace is offered, 
and, in 186-i, the Democrats should succeed in electing the 
President upon the slave-extension platform, and the Repub- 
licans, feeling that their interests were likely to be trampled 
upon by the dominant party, should say to the Democracy that, 
unless said Democrats would abandon the principles of their 
party, and secure the Republicans against the exercise of 
their principles in the future, by an amendment to the con- 
stitution itself, they (the Republicans) would dissolve this 
Union ? It will be observed that, if one party has the right 
to demand concessions, the other party has the same right, 
consequently it would not be the majority that would rule, 
but the minority. Neither have we any guarantee that, by 
granting the present demands, that other and still more ab- 
surd and threatening demands will not be made. We are 
now called upon to incorporate into the constitution certain 
additional rights and privileges for slavery ; and what is the 
threatened penalty that is offered to the freemen of this na- 
tion if they fail to grant what is demanded? Why it is 
nothing less than a complete overthrow and destruction of 
this government — and yet the Republicans are taunted with 
the charge of being the cause of all the consequences of the 
great calamity that seems awaiting our destruction. I call 
especial attention to this subject, more particularly in conse- 
quence of the probable effort that will be made to force what 
is called the "Crittenden Amendment," upon the people. It 
should be remembered that Mr. Crittenden proposes, not only 
to give all the territory south of 36° 30' to the slave inter- 
ests, but all the territory hereafter acquired. 

The restoration ot the Missouri Compromise sounds very 
smooth and pleasant to the ear, but ia it the Missouri Com- 
promise that Mr. Crittenden proposes to restore? Far from 



HOW TO MBIT IT. 'X\ 

it. Let us look at tho broad difference between the two 

measures, and see whether there is not something that looks 
as though there was deception, of the deepest <\yr, about to 
be practiced upon those who are desirous of preserving the 
territories free from the blighting curse of slavery. Wo have 
heard much about the .Missouri Compromise, also about Bir. 
Crittenden's amendment, and. for the benefit oi those who 
are not familiar with the two measures, we will give them 
both in full. The following is all that relates to the institu 
tion of slavery in what is called the .Missouri Compromise : 

"Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, That, in all the territory 
ceded by France to the United States, under the name of 
Louisiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees and thirty 
minutes north latitude, not included within the limits of the 
State contemplated by this act, (meaning .Missouri.; slavery 
and involuntary servitude, otherwise than in the punishment 
of crime, whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, 
shall be and is hereby forever prohibited ; provided, always. 
that any person escaping into the same, from whom service 
is lawfully claimed in any State or Territory of the United 
States, such fugitive may be lawfully re-claimed and conveyed 
to the person claiming his or her services as aforesaid." 

It will be perceived that the above section does not estab- 
lish slavery anywhere, but, on the contrary, it prohibited it 
in all the territory north of 36° 30' north latitude, while 

south of that (we can only infer for there is nothing explicit 
on the subject) the people were to have slavey or no1 as they 
might decide amongst themselves. Bat, in order to the more 
iully understanding the effect of the Missouri Compromise, 
it is necessary to know the amount of territory belonging, at 
that time, to the United States, lying south of said above 
mentioned line. The territory that now constitutes the State 
of Arkansas, and a small tract of Indian territory, which now 
belongs to four tribesof Indians, to-wit: the Chickasaw 9, Semi 
noles, Cherokces, and Choctaws, all of which territory, inclu- 
ding that of Arkansas, is not much larger than the State of 
Missouri, was all the territory that remained of the Louisiana 



94 THE CRISIS. 

purchase, belonging to the United States, south of 36° 30' 
north latitude, at the time of the passage of said compromise. 
How different, in effect, from the above is the Crittenden 
amendment. Let us see. The following is the said amend- 
ment that is harped about as being a restoration of the Mis- 
souri Compromise. Read and behold the difference: 

" Wiirreas, Serious and alarming dissensions have arisen 
between the Northern and Southern States, concerning the 
rights and security of the rights of slaveholding States, and 
especially their rights in the common territory of the "United 
States ; and whereas, it is eminently desirable and proper 
that these dissensions, which now threaten the very existence 
of this Union, should be permanently quieted and settled by 
constitutional provisions, which shall do equal justice to all 
sections, and thereby restore to the people that peace and 
good will which ought to prevail between all the citizens of tho 
United States : Therefore, 

" Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds 
of both houses concurring,) That the following articles bo, 
and are hereby proposed and submitted as amendments to 
the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid 
to all intents and purposes, as part of said Constitution, when 
ratified by conventions of three-fourths of the several States: 

"Art. 1. In all the territory of the United States now 
held, or hereafter acquired, situated north of latitude 36 deg. 
30 min., slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punish- 
ment for crime, is prohibited while such territory shall remain 
under territorial government. In all the territory south of 
said line of latitude, slavery of the African race is hereby re- 
cognized as existing, and shall not be interfered with by Con- 
gress, but shall be protected as property by all the depart- 
ments of the territorial government during its continuance. 
And when any territory, north or south of said line, within 
such boundaries as Congress may prescribe, shall contain the 
population requisite for a member of Congress according to 
the then federal ratio of representation of the people of the 
United States, it shall, if its form of government be republi- 






HOW TO MKET IT. MS 

can, be admitted into the Union, on an equal footing with the 

original States, with or without slavery, as the constitution 
of such new State may provide. 

"Art. 2. Congress shall have do power I" abolish slavery 
in places under its exelusive jurisdiction, and situate within 
the limits of States that permit the holding of slaves. 

"Art. 3. Congress shall have no power to abolish slavo- 
ry within the District of Columbia, so long as it exists in the 
adjoining Stall's of Virginia and .Maryland, or either, nor 
without the consent of the inhabitants, oor without just com- 
pensation first made to such owners of slaves as do not con- 
sent to such abolishment. Nor shall Congress at any time 
prohibit officers of the Federal Government, or members of 
Congress, whose duties require them to he in said District, 
from bringing with them their slaves, and holding them as 
Such during the time their duties may require them to remain 
there, and afterwards taking them from the District 

"Art. 4. Congress shall have no power to prohibit or hin- 
der the transportation of slaves from one State to another, or 
to a Territory, in which slaves are permitted to he held, whe- 
ther that transportation he by land, navigable rivers, or by 
sea. 

••Art. 5. That in addition to the provisions ef the third 
paragraph of the second section of the fourth article of the 
Constitution of the United States, Congr< B8 shall have power 
to provide by law, and it shall he. its duty so to provide, that 
the United States shall pay to the owner who shall apply for 
it, the full value of his fugive slave in all eases when tho .Mar- 
shal or other officer, whose duty it was to arrcsl said fugitive, 
was prevented from so doing by violence, or when, after ar- 
rest, said fugitive was rescued by force, and the owner tl 
by prevented and obstructed in the pursuit of his remedy for 
the recovery of his fugitive slave under the said clause of the 
Constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof Ami 
in all such cases, when the United Slates shall pay for such 
fugitive, they shall have the right, in their own name, to sue 
the county in which said violence, intimidation, or rescue was 
committed, and to recover from it, with interest and dama- 
ges, the amount paid by them for said fugitive slave. And 



06 THE CRISIS. 

the said county, after it has paid said amount to the United 
States, may, for its indemnity, sue and recover from the wrong 
doers or rescuers, by whom the owner was prevented from 
the recovery of his fugitive slave, in like manner as the own- 
er himself might have sued and recovered. 

" Art. 6. No tuture amendment to the Constitution shall 
affect the five preceding articles; nor the third paragraph of 
the secend section of the first article of the Constitution ; 
and no amendment shall be made to the Constitution which 
shall authorize or give to Congress any power to abolish or 
interfere with slavery in any of the States by whose law it 
is, or may be, allowed or permitted. 

And whereas, also, beside those causes of dissension em- 
braced in the foregoing amendments proposed to the Consti- 
tution of the United States, there are others which come with- 
in the jurisdiction of Congress, and may be remedied by its 
legislative power ; and whereas it is the desire of Congress, 
as far as its power will extend, to remove all just cause for 
the popular discontent and agitation which now disturb the 
peace of the country, and threaten the stability of its insti- 
tutions: Therefore, 

" 1. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the 
laws now in force, for the recovery of fugitives, arc in strict 
pursuance of the plain and mandatory provisions of the con- 
stitution, and have been sanctioned as valid and constitutional 
by the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States: 
that the slaveholding States are entitled to the faithful ob- 
servance and execution of those laws, and that they ought 
not to be repealed, or so modified or changed as to impair 
their efficiency ; and that laws ought to be made for the pun- 
ishment of those who attempt, by rescue of the slave, or 
other illegal means, to hinder or defeat the due execution of 
said laws. 

"2. That all State laws which conflict with the fugitive 
slave acts of congress, or any other constitutional acts of con- 
gress, or which in their operation impede, hinder or delay 
the free course and due execution of any of said acts, are null 
and void by the plain provisions of the constitution of the 



now To MEET IT. 

United States ; yet those State laws, void i 
given color to practices, and led to consequences, which i 
obstructed the due administration and execution of acl 
congress and especially the acts for the delivery of fugitive 
slaves, and have thereby contributed much to the discord and 
commotion now prevailing. Congress, th< r< fore, in the | 
ent perilous juncture, does not deem it improper fully 

and earnestly to recommend the repeal of those laws to tho 
several States which have enacted them, or such legislative 
corrections and explanations of them as may prevent tl 
being used or perverted to such mischievous purposes. 

"3. That the act of the 18th of September, 1850, c 
monly called the fugitive slave law, ought to be so amended 
as to make the fee of the commissioner, mentioned in the 8th 
section of the act, equal in amount, in the case 1 by 

him, whether his derision be in favor of or against the 
claimant. And to avoid misconstruction, the last clause of 
the 5th section of said act, which authorises the person hold- 
ing the warrant tor- the arrest or detention of a fugitive slave, 
to summon to his aid tho posse comitatus, and which declares 
it to be the duty oi all good citizens to assist bim in its exe- 
cution, ought to be amended so us to expressly limit the 
authority and duty to cases in which there shall be r 
or danger of resistance or rescue. 

"4. That the laws for the suppression of the African slave 
trade, and especially those prohibiting the importation 
slaves in the United Slates, ought to be mi tual, and 

ought to be thoroughly executed, and all further enactrn 
necessary to those ends ought to be promptly made." 

Tho above is unblushingly urged upon tli ime 

portions of the Democracy as being eminently cons 
and, above all, a middle ground, upon which all pal 
should be willing to stand or fall tor the Union; hut as for 
me I am entirely unable to see that there is any middle 
ground about it. What can we understand by this prop 
tion? Is it not granting all the South have ever asked? 
When, and wherein, have they asked more? Could Mr. 
Yancey himself have made out a stronger document ? And 



98 THE CRISIS. 

yet, we are told that the South are making great concessions 
when they submit to this measure, and cease to commit trea- 
son against the government. In the name of enlightened 
reason, I ask, could there be a greater insult offered to the 
free men of this nation, than to demand of them the sanc- 
tion of the above proposed amendment, and thus engraft it 
into the Constitution of this government, claiming, as we do, 
to be the freest government in the world. 

Upon an examination of Mr. Crittenden's proposition, it 
will be perceived that he irrevocably consigns to slavery all 
the Territory that we now have, or may hereafter acquire, 
south of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes, north latitude, 
and north of that line he leaves the matter for the people to 
decide when they come to form a State government. By 
comparing this measure with the Missouri Compromise, it 
will be perceived that Mr. Crittenden proposes to leave the 
northern territory in the same condition that the Missouri 
Compromise left the territory south of said line. 

But let us view this beautiful document of Mr. Crittenden's 
a little further, and see how modestly the people of the free 
States are asked to pay for Sambo whenever he gets it into 
his head to emigrate northward, provided some one or more 
of his sable brethren should chance to advise those whose 
duty it maybe to 'invite Sambo to return to the u Sunny 
South," to make tracks with the heels towards the shanty, 
and allow Sambo to remain where the winters are longer. 
Yes, we are asked by Mr. C. to pay for Sambo whenever the 
marshal, whose duty it is to arrest him, is intimidated. This 
sounds most beautiful. Let the people once agree to this and 
we would soon have the privilege of paying for hundreds of 
thousands, I might say millions, of the refractory portion of 
the slave population, and in order to understand these fully, 
the consequences of adopting Mr. Crittenden's amendment, 
it will be well for us to estimate the probable number of the 
slave population in the future, as well as their inclination to 
escape. 

It is a well known fact, that if the slave population should 
increase for the next eighty years as fast as they have for the 
past eighty years, they will amount to between torty and fif- 



HOW TO MEET IT. 99 

ty millions of inhabitants. Now let us imagine that number 
of slaves, with the natural increase of intelligence, together 
with a corresponding decrease of the preponderance of Afri- 
can blood in their veins, and it will not take a very strong 
imaginative individual to perceive that the number of fugi- 
tives will increase at a fearful rate, and to such an extent that 
it would impoverish the whole nation to pay for them. By 
a careful examination of Mr. Crittenden's amendment it will 
be perceived that it provides for recovering the value of tho 
slave, by the United States, of the county in which said vio- 
lence, intimidation, or rescue was committed. 

Now let us suppose that this should become a part and 
parcel of the Constitution of the United States, and someone 
or more of the States should pass laws nullifying said provi- 
sion, and at the same time demand a revision of the Consti- 
tution in such a manner as to annul said clause, as a condi- 
tion that they would remain in the Union, will our Union- 
saving friends be willing to meet the case by granting tho 
demand, or will they stand up for the enforcement of tho 
laws and the preservation of the Union? If so, then why not 
assist in enforcing the laws against South Carolina or any 
other State that proposes to nullify the Constitution and the 
laws made in pursuance thereof. Partisan prejudice cannot 
prevent any person from seeing that if one portion of the 
people have the right to make a demand fur concessions, then 
any and all other portions are entitled to the exercise of tho 
same right, and where such demands have been complied 
with in one case, there is no rule whereby they could justly 
be denied in another. Is there not great danger that by 
granting the South what they are now demanding, especially 
since the demand is accompanied with threats of such agravo 
character, we will establish a precedence that will sap the 
very principle upon which our government is based? In all 
Democratic governments it is the duty jf every individual 
to submit to the laws duly enacted by a constitutional major- 
ity ; and whenever one portion of tho people rebel against 
said laws they become not only traitors to their country but 
to the very principles upon which self government is found- 
ed. In view of this, it is clear to me that to make any con- 



100 THE CRISIS. 

cession, under the existing menacing threats, would be to of- 
fer a bounty to all future conspirators against the government, 
and thus endanger the peace of our country for all time to 
come. Such being the ease, why talk about compromises and 
concessions. Let us enforce obedience to the present govern- 
ment before we talk of compromises. To treat with men 
who bid defiance to the supreme law of the land, who are 
now engaged in open and active treason against the govern- 
ment, would be humiliating to every true American citizen, 
and a disgrace to us as a nation, besides showing to the world 
the most positive evidence of our weakness ; but on the other 
hand let firmness and justice be the order of the day, and 
although war may ensue let the consequences rest with those 
who are trying to overthrow this great temple of freedom, 
and we shall outride the threatend storm and transmit to 
posterity, unimpaired, this sacred legacy, bequeathed to us 
by our forefathers and sealed hy their blood. "We will then 
have shown oueselves worthy of the free institutions we have 
inherited, and our children's children will be stimulated by 
our example to extra exertions to perpetuate and strengthen 
the bonds that is to preserve this nation in all its destined 
magnificent grandeur. 

In conclusion, let me exhort my fellow-countrymen to stand 
or fall by our country. Let us not forget that our fathers, as 
well as we, loved peace and abhorred the calamities of war; 
and although the most of them have long since 'gone to that 
bourne from which no traveler returns," 3 T et when they were 
called to their country's service, they were surrounded by all 
the endearing ties which we now enjoy. Many a son received 
the mother's last parting blessing, and bid her his last fare- 
well this side of the grave. Husbands bid their wives an 
affectionate adieu, to meet no more on earth ; and many a 
bitter tear has flown from the weeping eyes of the loved ones 
in that lonely home, bereft Of ,\a father, husband, or brother 
who has fallen in the deadly struggle for the liberties we 
have inherited. And should we prove recreant to our trust, 
the immortal /spirits of those noble-hearted, self-sacrificing 
patriots who fell while struggling with a powerful tyrant in 
front, and a deadly savage foe in the hear, to gain the freedom 



HOW TO MEET IT. 101 

of this our beloved country, would rise up from their graves 
and rebuke us for our low, cringing cowardice. No, nay fel- 
low-countrymen, yon will not be found wanting for courage — 
yon will not allow this temple of freedom to be destroyed — 
you will stand by the Constitution and the Union, and prove 
yourselves worthy of your noble ancestry. 



TO INTRODUCE 

THE AMERICAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 

BY JOHN KING, M- D. 

PEEPAEED EXPRESSLY FOE FAMILY USE. 

This valuable work is a large, royal octavo volume of 
nearly 1,200 pages; containing nearly twice as much matter 
on the subject of health and disease, as can be found in any 
similar work ever before offered to the American people. In- 
stead of describing diseases and remedies in the m3"sterious 
and incomprehensible terms of the profession, the author has 
used language such as the people understand. No less than 
three hundred and seventy forms of disease, including diseases of 
women, diseases of children, chronic diseases, as well as those 
of a surgical nature are accurately described and the most 
successful methods of treatment made known. 

Nearly five hundred simple medicines are described, together 
with their virtues and medicinal uses. And the recipes for 
some two hundred and fifty valuable and successful compounds 
and preparations are given. 

The following are some of the numerous notices and recom- 
mendations the work has received by those who have given 
it an examination. 



The following is from the justly celebrated Dr. Burnham, proprietor 
of the Chronic Disease Infirmary of this city. 

Indianapolis, Ind., Jan. 14th, 1861 

A. D. STKEIGHT, ESQ.: Dear Sir— Having carefully examined 
a work of your publication entitled, "New American Family Physi- 
cian," by John King, M. D., I find in point of style that it is concise, 
couched in plain language, and free from technicalities. Voluminous in 
variety of topics discussed, it comprises an amount of practical matter 
pertaining to the preservation of health, the history and treatment of 
disease unequaled in adaptation for popular use. A more general diffu- 
sion of knowledge upon the topics therein discussed, will serve as one of 
the greatest protections against the intrusions of ignorant pretenders who 
propose to tamper with human health and lite. And I trust will be 
cordially hailed by every intelligent physician appreciating the fact that 
the stupid credulity of ignorance is much more forminable to encounter 
than the wisdom of an enlightened intelligence. In fine, the volume is 
worthy of the well earned reputation of its author, and I cheerfully com- 
mend it as highly deserving a promient place in the library of every 
family. Trulv yours, 

N. G. BUKNHAM, M. D. 



[From Dr. G. M. Thompson, Agent for Kansas] 
Tell Dr. King that I have had the pleasure of selling a copy of his 
"Physician " to Ex-Governor C. Kobinson, Ex-Governor F. P. Stanton, 
Ex-Governor Wilson Shannon, and all the principal men in the Terri- 
tory, as far as I have been able to canvass. 



Janesville, Wis., Oct. 23d, 1860. 
Dear Sir — I have examined the medical work of John King, M. D., 
entitled the " American Family Physician," &c 1 am highly pleased 
with it. In fact it supplies a long needed want, in the field of domestic 
medicine. It is written in a plain, easy style and readily comprehended 
by the non-professional reader, to which it will be a valuable aid in the 
treatment of the diseases incident to their own families. In truth, any 
one with a family will save double the C061 of the book yearly, besides 
much useless and pernicious drugging. The remedies recommended arc 
principally selected irom the vegetable kingdom, many of which may he 
found at home. Fmm my examination of this work and my acquaint- 
ance with the author, I can Bincerely recommend it to both the profes- 
sional and unprofessional reader, as a highly useful book and one that 
should be found in the library ot every peason, 

R B. TREAT, M. D. 
(Dr. Treat is mayor of the City of Janesville.) 



[From Vrof, A. •/. Hmoe. M. D.] 

I am acquainted with all the works on Domestic Medicine of any 
account, and unhesitatingly pronounce ''King's American Family Phy- 
iciau " the best. 

A. JACKSON HOWE. M. D„ 

Cincinnati, . I860. Professor of Surgery. 

[From, the Indianapolis ■Journal.'] 
* * * As to its origin, it conies from one who certainly stands 
at the head of the medical profession in the West. John King. M D., 
and Professor of Medicine, Cincinnati, is a man of more than twenty 
years' experience in the healing art. and stands pre-eminent as an educa- 
tor in the same. The hook deserves much credit for its simplicity of 
style. It is not written for the purpose of scientific display, but for the 
good of r/,c people. It goes further toward redeeming those practical facts 
contained in medical science from the dead masses of technical lumber, 
by which they have heretolbre been secluded from the comprehension of 
those who have the best right to understand them, than any work 
extant which it has been our privilege to review. Any man of common 
sense may * * * fully understand it: and by still further applica- 
tion of his mother wit, may successfully treat almost all forms of disease 
peculiar to this country, and thereby save much of hi.? hard earnings. * 
* * We commend it to the people generally. 



Janksvii.i.i:. Wis., Oct. 20, 1860. 
1 have examined with care the "New American Family Physician," 
by John King. M. D., and I am free to say that it contains a great 
amount of medical information which onjrht to be put into the hands of 
every family in the land. Its household Suggestions are invaluable. It9 
circulation will do much in the physical education of the people. 

Rev. II. C. TILTON. 
Presiding Elder of Janesville District Conference. 



J8@*"This work is sold only through Agents duly appointed by the 
publisher, or his General Agent. 
Address, 

A. D. STREIGHT, Publisher, Indianapolis, Ind. 
N. B. A General Agent wanted. One who is competent to take 
charge of a portion of territory and employ canvassers. 



THE CRISIS 



OP 



IN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 

UNITED STATES, 

ITS CAUSE, 
AND HOW IT SHOULD BE MET. 

BY A. I>. STREIGHT. 



The intention of the author in bringing this work before the people at 
this time, is to promote unity of action in sustaining our country from the 
dangers that seem threatening to not only destroy our government, but the 
very principles upon which our liberties are based. And, for the purpose 
of giving it a wide spread circulation, we have put the wholesale price 
within a fraction of the cost of manufacturing. 

PRICES. — 25 cents per single copy ; $2.25 per dozen copies ; $7.50 
for fifty copies, and $12.50 per hundred. 

Orders from the friends of the Union, and the trade generally, are solic- 
ited, and will receive prompt attention. Address 

A. D. STREIGHT, 

Indianapolis, Ind. 







° h ° ' aP' 













'• * ' ^ 







O " o . o 

> t • • . rt, V" , . 













oy 




« 



4V«T 

OOKBINOISC 

ep-C- T9Bi 










<*. 




